HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VILLAGE FILING 1 BLOCK 5B LOT A GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER 1998 REMODEL 1 OF 3 LEGALAPR-27-98 iloN ll:56 Atl FAr{N0.)P, 02/02
J,L.Vlsie Cs. ::titrli :1, l;,.:.
11100 S. Frorurgc l{ord V&n, Suittr 202
Vail, (blondo 81657
1rL305. {76, 30U2
Fax 303,,176.34?l
April27, 1998
Mr. Gcorgc Ruther
Town of Vail Communi ty Developmcnt
75 S. Frontage Road Wcst
Vail, Co EI657
RF,: Gastlrof Graguhacrmcr Wcst
Dear Georgc:
I am in rcceipt of Grcg llall's critique list dated 4/17198 for thc foundation penuit
sst ofdrawings for the Oasthof Cnamsharnmer Wcst projcct. This is the only
response wc have rccelved io thc 5 fivc wccks the plaus have been with the TOV in
the rcvie$, procc.ss. Wc will rcspond as quickly as we can to all of your concerns.
The Owncr, Dcsign lbam and Coutsptor are all comnritted !o complying with thc
town's rcquircmcnts. We knou' lhe concerns san be workcd out iu several days
time. In the meantimc, we aro rcgucstulrg a grading pcnnit bc issued today so we
can keep tbo hcavy cquipmcnt working onthe exoavatiou, as the deep utility work is
towcomplctc.
We had expected that any comments to the submiued design would hsvc roachcd us
soouer as the pmject scheduls is extremoly tight and wc arc paying thc 'lbwn of
Vail many thousands of dollars extra for a fast lrack review.
Please call Tony Faulhaber at476-5997 or mc at 476-3082 at your carlicst
convenioncc.
'w84
Craig lJrLrftz, L'
Vice Prosident -
Gary Goodall, TOV
GregHall, TOV
Pepi Gramshammer
Scon Peregoy, PSA
Tony Frtulhaber, JLV
FILE COPY
TOWN OF VAIL
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 8j,657
970-479-2 I s 8/479-2 I 39
FAX 970-479-2452
D e p arnnent of Co nnwni ty D eve lo pment
Junc 13. 1997
Kurt Scgcrbcrg
Picrcc. Scgcrbcrg & Associates Architccts
1000 South Frontagc Road West
Vail. Colorado 81657
ffil - ostt
Rc: Extcrior stairwav at thc Gasthof Gramshammcr
Dcar Kurt.
I havc complctcd my revicw of thc cxtcrior stairway at thc Casthof Cramshamme r. Bascd on thc
scopc of thc pro.icct, I was ablc to staff approvc thc rcqucst with scvcral conditions. Thc purposc
of this lcttcr is to infurm you of thc approval and of thc conditions placcd on the approval.
-l-hc conditions of approval arc as follows:
*. Thatanadditional sixsquarcfcctoflandscapcarcabcaddcdtothcplans. Thiscnsulcs
dv' that thcrc is no nct loss oflandscapc arca on thc propcrty. and thcrcforc. a variancc is not
rcquircd.
Z That thc proposcd iron railing along thc top of the stairway match thc railing on thc
ov ' cxisting dining dcck.
3. That thc cxisting shrub adjaccnt to the dining dcck bc transplantcd to the location
indicated on the approved plan.
4. That the two lilac trecs be transplanted in the cxisting landscape planter on Bridge Strcet.
5. That the cxisting aspen trces (2) remain and not be disturbed during construction, Should
the trces have to bc removed, thc contractor shall contact tbe Town of Vail prior to
removing or damaging the trees. If the trecs are approved to bc removcd, they shall be
rcplaccd with thrce, multi-stem, clump aspens totaling 9" - 12 caliper inches of trec.
Again, I have staffapproved your requcst for the cxtcrior stairway at the Gasthof Grarnshammer.
Should you or Pepi have any qucstions regarding thc approvaJ, please do not hesitate to contact
{g *r"r"""o rur*
,. /l tlrq
-:r . .al
j mc. {ou .tl t*Xrlh. at 419-21 45'
Good luck with your Projcct'
fJ'--"1 Q'**1,^-t
(.icorgc Ruthcr
Town Planncr
d*ign Review Action F0n
TOWN OF VAIL
Category Number Date Ai t cil7
Project Narne:
Building Name:Ct ii-,1'l .i,F f:lArrti rtL-,\'t.r.t.l'z
Proiect Description:
Owner, Address and Phone:
Legal Description: Lot _ Block_ Subdivision Zone District UJ:
Project Street Address: ')i l'':,,',, 'i:i
Board / Staff Action
Motion by:Vote:
Seconded by:
I Approval
D Disapproval
..[i staff Approval
Conditions: ','
DRB Fee Pre-paid
hi
I
LE CurY
TOIIN OFVAIL
Department of Community Deve lopment
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado E1657
970-479-2138
HX 970-479-2452
December 16,1997
Kurt Segerberg
Pierce, Segerberg & Associates Architects, Inc.
1000 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81658
Re: Pepi's Ski Locker Stair and Landscapi
Dear Kurt,
I, Block 5-8, Vail Village Fi;;=-==\
On 'f uesday, December 16, I inspected the stair and landscape improvements completed at the
Gasthof Gramshammer. Upon completion of my inspection, I determined that several outstanding
issues need to be resolved.
Please address the following issues so that I can complete a final sign-offfor the stair and landscape
improvements:
l. For aesthetic purposes, the wrought iron rail originally proposed atop the landscape wall
needs to be installed. The rail should be approximately l&t'-24'in height.
2. Please submit a detail for the light over the new entry. The fixture that has been installed is
not permitted. In addition, please remove the old light fixture over the new stair. The lights
that are installed in the wall provide ample and safe lighting for the area.
3. Please submit a revised landscape plan, The revised plan shall indicate the size and quantity
of the plant material. Please be certain to add at least nine caliper-inches of trees to mitigate
the removal of an existing Aspen.
Again, each of the above-described issues needs to be resolved prior to my signing-offotr a final
approval. Ifyou have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call. You can reach me by
telephone at479-2145.
Sincerely,
rGQ'^*ru-t
George Ruther, AICP
Senior Planner
{p'n'"uo'n'"o
o
TO\/.COlV|iill, DEL4 DEPI
PRELIMINARY ENVIROhIMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER ADDITION
VaiI, Colorado
&bmined to the Planning and Environmental Commission, Tbwn of Vail
on behalf of Pepi Gramshammer
Prepared by Design Workshop, Inc., VaiI, Colorada
Much 24, 1997
PRELIMINARY ENVIROI\MENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
GASTHOF' GRAMSHAMMER ADDITION
Vail, Colorado
Submitted to the Planning and Environmental Commission, Town of Vail
on behalf of Pepi Gramshammer
Prepared by Design Worl<shop, Inc., Vai[ Colorado
March 24. 1997
The purpose of this document is to provide the Town of Vail with a preliminary assessment of
possible environmental impacts related to a proposed addition to the existing Gasthof
Gramshammer property in Vail Village. As a preliminary review, an environmental assessment
is not intended to quantiS the severity of impacts nor provide definitive solutions, but simply to
identify issues that may require further consideration and response during the development
planning and review process in order to assure adequate mitigation,
This preliminary draft is based on a review of schematic architectural plans submitted to the
Town of Vail on February 24, 1997 as part of an application for a major exterior alteration per-
mit. The assessment of environmental issues may change as these plans undergo revision in the
development review process.
Summarv
The proposed addition to the existing Gasthof Gramshammer is unlikely to cause serious envi-
ronmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. In fact, by resolving existing problems, the expan-
sion of the hotel will likely result in several benefits to the environment.
Most of the potential environmental impacts will be temporary and will result from construction
activities. Minor temporary impacts may fall within the following issues:
. Decreased water quali$t, incrcosed erosion, runofr, and sedimentation
. Decreased air quality
. Distarbed aquatic and terrestrial environments
. Heightened noise levek
These impacts can be addressed by implementation of mitigation measures including protective
erosion control and construction management practices. Mitigation recommendations are pro-
vided in a separate section of this document.
Environmental Assessment - Pepib Addition Design Workshop
3/24/97 I
Environmental impacts caused by the completed project are most likely in the areas of water
quality, groundwater, air quality, and biological resources. More significant impacts may be
associated with circulation, parking, and visual quality issues. In sum, potential impacts which
may result from the completed project include:
. Slight reduclion in available parking for the Gasthof Gramshammer guests
. Slightly increased vehicular trallic in Vail Village
. Restricted service and delivery areas and access
. Removal of several mature conifers in the stream setback
In general, and from a less purely environmental perspective on community impacts, the likely
outcomes of the addition to the Gasthof Gramshammer will be beneficial to the existing site
and the immediate street environment. In addition, the expansion of the hotel facility is consis-
tent with the Town of Vail's Comprehensive Plan, one goal of which is to increase the number
of 'hot beds' and thereby provide a positive economic impact to the community in the form of
tax revenues from increased lodging and sales.
View from Childrenk Fountain Plaza of the existing pqrking
ground.
with Gasthof G entry in the fore-
Environmental Assessment - Pepi s Addition Design Workshop
3/24/97 2
Background
The Gasthof Gramshammer was built in the early 60's and has become an important landmark
in Vail. Built in the Tyrolean style, it has played an integral part in the development of the
character and ambiance of Vail Village and is one of the town's most popular gathering spots.
The present three story structure has 28 hotel rooms, an indoor/outdoor restaurant and patio, a
retail ski and clothing shop, a nightclub (Sheika's), and a surface parking lot for approximately
18-20 cars on the northwestern side of the building.
While the hotel structure and its architectural style are harmonious with the aesthetic quality
and pedestrian context ofthe Vail Village core, the existing surface parking lot is not. On the
contrary cars intrude on the streetscape and interrupt the pedestrian experience. Adjacent to
one of the main pedestrian destinations of Vail Village, the Children's Fountain Plaza, the park-
ing lot is a visual and physical detriment. The parking configuration within the lot is haphazard
and unclear, and maintenance and delivery activities take place within view of the Children's
Fountain Plaza. ln addition, drainage in this space is problematic, as snow melt and storm
runoff laden with sediments and pollutants drain directly into Gore Creek.
E wironmental Assessment ' Penib Addition Design workshop
3/24/97 3
View from existing parking lot of Children's Fountain Plsza with Vail Mounlain in the background.
The Expansion Proposal
The proponent proposes to expand the existing Gasthof Gramshammer by construction of an
addition in the space presently utilized as the surface parking lot. This addition will include 9
hotel rooms, an apaxtment, a small office, a spa and fitness area for hotel guests, and additional
retail space. The basement level of the existing hotel will also be remodeled by replacing
Sheika's nightclub with an enlarged ski storage locker facility. A new exterior stairway will be
designed to replace the existing stair to this facility. ln addition, an employee lounge and locker
area will be provided in the basement.
The expansion proposes a total 10,962 square feet ofnew space.
The lower level parking garage will be accessed by a heated, l2o/o ranping driveway. Current
plans show 15 spaces in the new g€uage, although some reconfiguration ofspaces may be nec-
essary for easier maneuvering.
The proposed addition conforms to the Town of Vail Commercial Core I (CCl) zoning ordi-
nance and the Urban Design Guide Plan. Gross Residential Floor Area (GRIA) restrictions for
10 units and common area have been met. The 50' stream setback from the centerline of Gore
Creek will not be violated.
Temporary Environmental Impacts Related to Construction Activi(v
Environmental impacts may be caused by one or more phases of development activity: the
demolition of the existing paved lot, the construction of the new building wing, and site devel-
opment. The following discussion highlights potential temporary environmental impacts related
to the construction of the Gasthof Gramshammer expansion which may require further investi-
sation.
l. Water Quality
The primary issues related to water quality are erosion and sediment control, runoff, and
stormwater management.
Erosion and sediment control will be of greatest concern during demolition, construc-
tion, and sitework. Construction activities on the site will need to be carefully managed
to prevent the discharge of sediment over the bank and into the creek. Snowmelt and
stormwater runoff from the constuction site will need to be diverted away from the
streambank and into a detention pond, where sediment can settle out before runoff
enters the creek.
Ewironmental Assessment - Peoib Addition Design llorluhop
3/24/97 4
Yiew from northern bank of Gore Creek of riparian vegetation on southern banh below the acisting parking lot.
2, Air Quality
It is possible that during excavation and construction of the new building, there will be a
slight but temporary increase in airbome particulates and fugitive dust as a result of con-
struction activity and increased hips to the site by diesel-fueled construction vehicles.
3, Biological Impacts (Riparian Habilat/ Terrestrial and Aquatic Environments)
Riparian habitat is present on the bank ofGore Creek adjacent to the proposed develop-
ment site. The quality of this habitat would need to be evaluated by a qualified special-
ist, such as a wildlife or fishery biologist. Along the creek's edge, in particular, there
are a number of willows that provide cover for insects and shade for fish. This side of
Gore Creek offers substantially better habitat than the opposite bank. Pockets of ripari-
an habitat are important because they facilitate upstream and downstream migration of
insects, fish, mammals, and birds.
Although the proposed parking structl.re does not encroach into the 50' stream setback,
excavation for the foundation walls will necessarily extend beyond that line and force
removal of some riparian vegetation in the excavation area. During construction, the
remaining riparian vegetation and the edge quality of the streambank will need to be
protected to prevent impacts to aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Runoffand etosion con-
Ewironmenlal Assessment - Peoi's Addition Design Workshop
3/24/97
1.
trol measures, such as a silt fence, will help to protect the creek-side vegetation. An
erosion control plan will need to be provided by the project proponent. A replanting and
tree replacement program should be developed in coordination with town staff to com-
pensate for the removal ofany significant trees and shrubs.
Impact to wetlands is difficult to discem, as no wetland delineation has been done for
the project site. It is likely that the measures taken to avoid impacts to the terrestrial
and aquatic environments will also prevent impacts to wetland vegetation, should it be
present on this site.
Environmental Impacts Related to the Completed Project
Environmental impacts resulting from the completed project are not likely to be severe. Water
quality, groundwater, air quality, and biological resources may be slightly affected by the pro-
ject. Modified urban character and circulation pattems will likely result from a slight increase
in the visitor population, the building mass, and the enhancement of the pedestrian streetscape.
Water Quality
When completed, the expansion of the Gasthof Gramshammer can be expected to
improve water quality. The replacement of the existing surface parking lot with an
enclosed parking area will allow better control and filtration of runoff tainted with vehi-
cle pollutants. The project presents the opportunity to redesign the site's stormwater
management system and to add a proper filtration mechanism to eliminate direct dis-
charge of runoff laden with contaminants into the creek.
Groundwater
The development of the new addition along the upper part of the streambank will alter
the current regime of groundwater infiltration and surface runoff. The below-grade
parking level may affect groundwater quality. Impacts are diffrcult to determine because
no data exists on seasonal depths to groundwater. Meltwater from the new driveway and
within the proposed parking garage will be controlled and filtered. In addition, an engi-
neered dewatering system may be necessary. These measures should minimize potential
impacts to groundwater quality. Additional information would be necessary to clarify
the magnitude of these impacts.
Air Quality
Air quality degradation in a mountain resort community originates primarily from win-
ter road maintenance (materials used to sand the roads become airborne as traffic pul-
verizes them and stirs them up), from increased vehicular traffic, and from wood burn-
ing fireplaces. The relatively small amount of incremental traffic associated with the
additional nine hotel rooms is not likely to adversely affect existing air quality condi-
Ewironmental Assessment - Pepib Addition Design Worl<shop
,
3.
3/24/97
4.
tions in Vail. None of the hotel rooms will have fireplaces; a gas buming fireplace is
proposed in the apartrnent.
Vegetation
There are a number of mature and infant conifers within the 50' stream setback. It is
not yet clear how many of these trees may have to be removed, but cunent architechral
plans show foundation walls so close to some of the largest trees that they may not sur-
vive. Permanent removal of any tees will be mitigated by a tree replanting and replace-
ment plan. The applicant will work with Town planning staffto identify the trees that
must be protected and to agree on a mitigation plan to replace those that must be
removed. No removals will be done without the consent of Town staff
The extent to which riparian vegetation in the stream setback is dependent upon ground-
water flows and surface runoff from the project site is unknown. Because the new
structure will block these flows, some supplementary drip irrigation in the setback may
be needed to sustain existing and newly planted trees.
Geologic and Other Natural Hazards
No geologic hazards have been identifred on this site. The majority of the property and
all of the proposed building expansion are above the active high-water mark and the
100-year floodplain. An exception, however, is the stairway proposed on the northeast-
em comer of the site, which encroaches into the 100-year floodplain. Further modeling
and floodplain analysis will be required to determine the severity of risk posed by this
design. This element may require reconfiguration to reduce the risk of flood damage.
Transportation and Traffic Impacts
Ewironmental Assessment - PepiS Addition Design Workshop
3/24/97 7
J.
3.
2.Parking
Trash and Deliveries
At present, hash from the lodge is picked up from a fully screened trash enclosurejust
south of the existing lobby entry on the southwest side of the building (facing the
Children's Fountain plaza). Food and beverage deliveries to the restaurant are made
from the Bridge Sneet side. These hash and delivery methods work as well as can be
expected in the village core, and no change in them is contemplated.
Pedestrian C irc u latia n
Although no site Iandscape plan has been submitted as yet, the project addition can be
expected to improve pedestrian circulation patterns and directional clarity around the
Children's Fountain. The development of the area between the Gasthof Gramshammer
and the Creekside Building will frame and define the perimeter of the plaza" thereby
developing a better sense ofenclosure and enhancing the pedestrian experience. Paving
materials will be in keeping with the existing paving design, reinforcing the space and
completing the design of the plaza. The improvement of the stairs leading into the new
ski locker area will also help in defining the pedestrian ffansition from the street into the
building.
During construction, pedestrian circulation will be unavoidably, but temporarily, dis-
turbed by the presence of heavy machinery, construction traffrc, barriers and other relat-
ed construction equipment. Adherence to a strict and efficient construction schedule can
minimize these impacts. Proper informational, directional, and cautionary signage will
also enstue that pedestrians ale awaf,e of the addition.
Etnironmental Assessment - PepiS Addition Design Worluhop
3/24/97 I
4.
Visual Impacts
1. Building Mass and Height
The addition will not be taller or larger in mass than the existing building or those adja-
cent to it, The south building face, as proposed, is low in profile at the FountainPlaza
and continues the theme of the existing entry canopy. The main bulk of the structure is
to the north ofthe property along the creek, where pedestrian scale is not as critical.
The architecture of the proposed development will be in keeping with the character of
the neighborhood and will match the detail of the existing Gasthof Gramshammer. A
scale model of the new addition in its village core context would assist the Town staff
and review boards in considering this issue during the development review process.
2. Wew Corridors and the Creekside Building
Established view corridors will not be affected. The highest point of the building is
below the Gasthof structure and fits tightly behind the Creekside Building. The pro-
posed addition cannot be seen from Bridge Street. The greatest potential impact ofthe
addition will be on views from units in the northeast comer of the Creekside Building,
The proposed addition leaves very little space between the Creekside Building and the
new Gasthof addition. Coordination in the design and development of this edge must
occur between owners of both buildings to avoid poor views from one building into the
other and to maintain adequate access to uses in the Creekside Building.
3. Quahty of Public Spaces
The location of the proposed addition is cunently utilized for visitor parking. The site is
characterized by haphazard accessibility and circulation and a weak visual and contextu-
al identity in relationship to adjacent spaces. The resulting aesthetic quality ofthe space
is poor. A primary goal for the Vail Village core set forth in the 1991 Town of Vail
Streetscape Master Plan ist'1o enhance the existing streetscape framework."
In keeping with this goal, the proposed expansion of the Gasthof Gramshammer will
have important beneficial impacts on the quality of the adjacent Children's Fountain
Plaza. The expansion will resolve and clarify the circulation pattems in this plaza of
Vail Village by framing and better defining the existing public space. Replacement of
the surface parking lot space should greatly enhance the pedestrian character by screen-
ing the vehicular use area and finalizing the delineation of the Children's Fountain Plaza
public space.
Ewironnental Assessment - Pepi's Addition Design Worltshop
3/24/97 9
I I q
'i1'!
ll I - .i'11
:e;'i:; "' {bi" u'
Wew of existing parking lot entrance between the Gasthof building and Creekside Building.
Unresolved Issues and Ouestions
At this stage in the design development process there are a number of unresolved issues. These
have been raised throughout this document, but are summarized here to guide further investiga-
tion. They are:
1. Parking and Seruice Needs
2. Construction Staging and Scheduling
Due to the tight space in which the addition is being proposed and its proximity to the
Children's Fountain Plaza, construction activities may pose significant visual disruption
and physical hazards to pedestrians. Careful management and scheduling of construc-
tion will be required through the duration of the project in order to minimize such
impacts.
Environmental Assessment - Penib Addition Desisn workshoP
3/24/97 n
3.Interface with the Creekside Building
Coordination between the owners of the Creekside Building and the Gasthof building
should occur in the development ofthe parking lot space. There are opportunities for the
sharing ofrequired service spaces, such as a trash area, a delivery area, and short-term
parking.
Groundwater Impacts
Consultation with an engineer should be undertaken, as it is likely that an engineered
dewatering plan will be required in the construction of the parking garage. Since
groundwater information is not available for this site, a survey establishing tlre depth to
the groundwater table and other important hydrologic information would be useful.
Recommendations for Mitigation
While the environmental impacts this project poses are deemed to be minor, proper mitigation
planning will need to occur in order to maintain and enhance the existing environmental quultty
of this site. What has been provided in this environmental impact assessment is a brief survey
of the range of impacts which may occur during construction and after completion of the pro-
posed addition. In order to guide the development of an adequate mitigation plan for the pro-
ject, the preparation of the following program elements is recommended:
. Erosion control plan
. Tree protection and replacement plan for the riparian corridor
. Stormwater management plan
. Construction staging and scheduling plan
. On-site traffrc management plan (during construction)
. Temporary pedestrian barrier and signage
. Revegetation plan for the stream setback area (for habitat enhancement)
Ewironmental Assessment - PepiS Addition Design Workshop
4.
3/24/97 11
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER HOTEL ADDITION
SQUARE FOOTAGE ANALYSIS
o
o F i'E!TRYoNE\GEoRGE\GA STGRAM.SQF
Floor
Levels
Common Area -
Square Footage
Commercial Area -
Square Footage
Accommodation
Units - Square
Footage
Dwelling Units -
Square Footage
Parking Area -
Square Footage
Total - Square
f,'ootage
Parking
Level
712 sq. ft.4,317 sq. ft.5,089 sq. ft.
lst Floor 3,772 sq. ft,625 sq, ft.926 sq, ft.5,323 sq. ft.
2nd Floor 654 sq. ft.1,952 sq. ft.2,605 sq. ft.
3rd Floor 589 sq. ft,405 sq, ft.1,652 sq. ft.2,646 sq. ft.
TOTAL 5,7E7 sq. ft.625 sq. ft.3,283 sq. ft.1,552 sq. ft.4317 sq. ft.15-564 so. ft.
ORICINAL
MEMORANDI]M
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Deparbtent
DATE: May 12,1997
SUBJECT: A request for a wOrkSession to discuss a major exterioralteration in ccl and a
minor subdivision, to allow for the consffuction of a parking garage' 8
u"ro.-od"tioo rmits, 1 condominium and new retai[office space at the Gaslhof
Gramshammer, located at23| B. Gore Creek Dr.lPart of Lot A, Block 58' Vail
Village lst Filing.
DESCRIPTION OF TIIE REOUEST
The applicant, Pepi Gramsharnmer, represented by Kurt Segerberg of Pierce, Segerberg,
& Asilciates, is requesting a worksession with the Planning and Environmental
Commission @ecjto disJuss a major exterior alteration in the Commercial C-nte 7 TnDLe
Distict (CCl) and a minor subdivision creating Pepi's Parcel, t9 alloY follhe
constnrction of a hotel addition at the Gashtof Gramshammer, located at 23 1 E' Gore
Creek Drive.
The proposed hotel addition to the Gasthof cramshammer is proposed on the existing
s.rrface p-tt"g area located between the Gasthof Gramshammer and the creekside
Condominium Building. The addition will contain an underground parking struoture for
up to twenty (20) vehioles, 622 square fcet ofexpanded retail space. 1,940 square feet of
spa/exercise iaciiity space, eight new accommodation units (3,41lsq.ft.) and one new
condominium with an attached lock+ff unit (1,692 sq'ft')'
The purpose of the worksession is to femiliarize the PEC with the proposed major
exterior alteration and minor subdivision requests and to provide an opportunity
for the PEC and the staff to give feedback to the applicant on the issues identiffed in
Section VI of this memorandum.
BACKGROUI\D
on February 24,lgg7,Pepi Gramshammer, zubmitted an application for amajor exterior
alteration and aminor subdivisionto the Gasthof Gramshammer' Uponpreliminary
review of the proposal, it was determined by staff that the removal of the existiug, legal,
non-oonfomring, unsfuctured (surface), off-street parking area and subsequent
constuction ofa structured off-steet parking area constituled-a cfanee in land use' and
therefore, tfr" prop"rt' -rrst be brought into iompliance with the development regulations
presoribed in the MuniciPal Code'
, on Aprll 14, 1997, the Planning and Environmental Commissionupheld ( 6'l Bishop
opposed) an appeaiof ao adminishative decision regarding the applicant's proposal,
finding that,
..A private and public unstructured (surface) off-strel t:Hd" parking is-a
.
different land use than private anO pulnc structured (undergromd/enclosed) off-
street vehicle Parking."
and therefore, the property must be brought into oornpliance with the develo'pment regUlations
prescribed in the Municipal Code, or
" "h"ogu
of non-conforming use must be approved by
theVail Town Council.
. On May 6, 1997, the Vait Town Council approved(5-1 Johnston opposed) a requestfor
a change of non-oonfomring use, thus allowing for the construction of an underground
parking structure, witn on""oondition. fne Coirncil's condition restricts the on-site vehicle
parking to no more than twenty (20) vehicles'
ZONING AI{ALYSIS
The following analysis summarizes the relevant zoning statistics for this request:
23 1 East Gore Creek Drive/Part of Lot A, Block 5-B, Vail Village
First Filing.
Commercial Cnre I (CCD
0,2244 acre/ 9,774.8 square feet
0.1642 apre/ 7,152.3 square feet
Legal:
Taring:
Lot Area:
Buildable Area;
Development
Stenderds:
GRFA:
# of Units
Site Coverage:
Allowable
5,722 sq.ft., or 80%
4 DU's
5,722 sq.fr.,or 80%
Propoeed
5,103 sq.ft., or TlVo
5 DU's (l DU & 8 AU's)
5,783 sq.ft., or 8l%
Landscaping:
Parking/Loading:
no net reduction
in existing landscaPing
No parkiug shall be
provided on-site. All
parking requirements
shall be met via PaY-in-
lieu,
3,737 q.ft..
The applicant will
pay into the Town
Parking Fund.
IV. IVTINORSUBUVTSIONCRITERIA
One of the basic premises of subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the
creation of a new lot m;t be;et. This pro]ect will be reviewed under the Minor Subdivision
Criteria, pursuant to Chaper 17, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code'
The first set of review criteria to be considered by the Planning and Environmental
CommissionforaMinorSubdivisionApplicationareasfol|ows:
A. Lot Area - The minimum lot or site area shall be five thousand square feet of
buildable area. The proposed lot area will be 7,1 52 square feet ofbuildable area
and9,774 square feet total' Therefore, this criteria has been met'
B. Frontaee - Each lot in the ccl Zone Distict shall have a minimum frontage of
tlirry t:o) feet. The proposed lot has slighfly more tian thhty feet of frontage
(31.21), and therefore this criteria has been met'
C. Site Dimensions -Unlike other zone districts which require minimum site
dim"osioos aod configurations, the ccl Zone District does not require minimum
site dimensions.
The second set of review criteria to be considered with a mlnor subdivision request are as
outllned in the subdlvision regulations' and are as follows:
,,The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the_application is in-
complianoe witntrre intendedpurpose of chapter lT,thezoningordinanoe and other
pertinent regulations that the pnC dee*s applicable. Due consideration shall be given to
the recommendations by public agencies, utitity companies and other agencies consulted
under Section 17.16.09-0. The PEt shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness in regard to Town policies related to suMivision contol, densities
pioe6.A, regulationl ordinances ind resolutions and other applicable documents, effects
on the aesthetics of the Town, environmental integrity and compatibility with surrounding
uses."
The subdivision purpose statements are as follows:
l. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development and
proposals will be evaluated and to provide information as to the type and extent of
improvernents required.
staffResponse: one of the underlying purposes of subdivision regulations, 1s yell
u, uoy d"ffi*ent control, is to estaUiistr-basic ground rules which the staff, the
pEC, the applicant and the community can follow in the public review process'
Thereviewofthisrequestwillfollowtheregulationsprescribedforminor
zubdivisions in the Municipal Code.
2. To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without oonflict with development
on adj acent ProPerties,
StaffResponse: The applicant's lot is bound on three sides by developed property
and by GLre Creek on the fourth side. Pursuant to the development standards
prescribed for the CCI Zone District, each of the developed propedies, with the-
Lxception ofthe Creekside CondominiumBuilding, have been developed up to the
common property line. The Creekside Condominium Building could potentially be
e*panaea wittintheir property boundaries. The staffdoes not believe that the
proposed minor zubdivision wilt negatively impact orconflict with fuhue
ievelopment on adjacent properties. to ensure that future conflicts do not arise,
access easements and agriernents have been platted prior to this minor subdivision
aPPlication'
3. To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the municipality and the value of
buildings and improvements on the land.
StaffResponse: Staff does not believe that the applicant's request will negatively
impact the value of land in the Town of Vail generally, or in the immediate area
specifically. The applicant's plans are in compliance with existiug zoning and the
adopted Town of Vail Land Use Plan.
4. To insure that subdivision of property is in compliance with the Town Zoning Or:dinance,
to achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable ielationship among land uses, consistent
with munioipal development objectives.
StaffResponse: Staffdoes not believe that the minor subdivision will negatively
impact G desired harmonious. convenient, workable relationship among land
uses, consistent with municipal development objectives'
5.To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient
transportahon, water, *"*og", schools, parks, playgrounds' lec^re{io:al and other public
requirernents and facilities ii g*."rfiy to pro-vide that public facilities will have suffrcient
capaclty to serve the proposed subdivision.
StaffResponse: staffdoes not believe the requested minor subdivision will have
any adverse impacts on any of the abovedescribed criteria'
To provide for accurate legal descripions of newly subdivided land and to establish
reasonable and desirable construction, dssign standards and procedures'
staff Response: As required, the applicant has submitted a preliminary final plat
p*p"t"aLy a land surveyor licensed to practice in Colorado'
To prevent the pollution of air, steams, and ponds, to insure adequacy of drainage
facilities, to safiguard the water table and utcourage the wise use andmanagement of
natural resowoes-throughout the municipality in order to preserve the integrity, stability
and beauty of thc community and the value of land'
staff Response: staff does not believe the proposed minor subdMsion will have
any negative impacts on the abovedescribed criteria'
V. MAJOR EXTERIOR ALTERATION CRITERIA
The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by the Town of Vail Municipal
Code. The emphasis of this review is on the pro'posal's compatibility with the zoning oode' the
Town of Vail Steetscape Master Plan, the Viit Vittage Urban Design Guide Plan, the Vail Village
Design Considerations and the Vail Comprehensive Plan.
pursuantto Section 18.24.010 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the purpose ofthe
Commercial Core I Zone Distict is,
"To provide sites and maintain the unique character of the Vail Village commercial
ur"u, *itt its mixture of lodges and commercial establishments in a predominantly
pedestrian environment. Th" comm"."ial c;ore I Tnne District is intended to
ensure adequate light, air, qpen sp&ce' and other amenities appropriate to the
permitted typ6 ofioitaiogs aod us"t. The distict regulations in accordance with
it . Vuit Vittage Urban De-sign Guide Plan and Design Considerations prescribe site
development standards that are intended to ensure the maintenance and
6.
1
B.
c.
preservation of trre tightly clustered araangements of buildings fronting on
-pedestrian
ways aod pobiic greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building
scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the Village"'
staffwill uot be addressing this critefia at this time. staffwill provide a
review of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan at the time of fiual review by
the PEC.
Exterior Alteration Criteria.
1. Urban design considerations.
a. Pedestrianization
b. Traffic penetration
c. SteetscaPe framework
d, Steet enclosure
e. Sheet edge
f. Buildingheight
g. Views
2. ArchitecturaUlandscape considerations.
Roofs
Facades
Balconies
Decks and Patios
Accent elements
Landscape elements
Senrice
Upon review of the Town of Vail Steetscape Mastel Plan, staffhas determined
that no recommended improvements or opportunities are directly related to the
applicant's proposal.
comPliance withthe vail comp*ehensive Plan
a.
b.
c,
d.
e.
f.
c.
D.
E.
Vail Village Master Plan
The vail village Master Plan has been adopted as an elemert of the Vail comprehotsive
plan. The vail village Master plan is intended to guide the Town in developing land use
laws and policies for coordinating development by the public and private se-ctors in vail
Vittug" and in implementing coninunity goall for public improvements' Jvlost
i*poi-,tfy, the Vail Vilh; Master Plan shall serve as a guide to th9 sff,.review boards'
and rown council io aoaly;ng future proposals for developmant in Vail village and in
legislating effective ordinancei to d*fwiih such development. Fo1 lhe citizans and guests
of Vail, the Master Plan provides a clearly stated set of goals and obj_e$ives outlining how
the village will grow ia the future. upon review of the vail village Master Plan, the staff
believes lhe following goals, objectives and policies are relevant to the applicant's request:
Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique
archltectirralicaie of t-tre vlllage in order to sustain its sense of
communitY and identitY.
l'lobjective:ImplernentaoonsistentDevelopmentReviewProcessto
reinfmce the character of the Village.
l.l.lPolicy:Developmentandimprovemerrtprojectsapprovedin
the Village shall be consistent with the goals'
objective, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
I ^2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential
and commercial facilities.
Goel ll2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic
healthandviabi|ityfortheVil|ageandforthecommunityasawhole.
Recognize the variety ofland uses found in the l0 sub-areas
throulhout the Village and allow for development that is
compatible with these established land use patterns'
Increase the number of residential units available for short-
term, overnight accommodations'
2.3. 1 Policy: The development of short-term accommodation
units is stongly encouragcd' Residential units that
are developed above oristing density levels are
required to be designed or managed in a manner that
makes them available for short-term overuight
rental.
2.1Objective:
2.3 Objective:
2.5Obiective:Encouragethecontinuedupgrading,renovationand
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to
better serve the needs of our guests.
2.5.1 Polic$ Recreation amenities, coilrmon areas' meeting
facilities and other ameoities shall be preserued and
enhanced as a part ofany redevelopment oflodging
properties.
Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking
experience throughout the Village.
3.2 Objective: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffi.c iu the village to
the greatest extent Possible.
3.2'lPolicy:Vehiculartrafficwillbeeliminatedorreducedto
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedestrianized areas of the Village'
3.4 Objective: Develop additional sidewalks, pdesfiian-mly walkways
and accessible green spaae areas, including pocket parks
and stream access.
3.4'l Policy: Physical iraprovements to properly adjacent to
steam bacts shall not firther restict public access'
Goat #5 Increase and improve the capaclty, efficiency and aesthetlcs of the
trsnsportation and circuletion system throughout the Vlllage'
5.1 objective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking
facilities.
5.1 .3 policy: Seek locations for additional stnrctured public and
private Parking.
5.1.5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be sfrongly
encouraged to provide undergrormd or visually
concealed Parking.
5.2 Objective: Encourage the use of public tansportation-to minimize the
use of private automobiles throughout Vail'
5.2.2 Polioy: The Town shall facilitate and encourage the
operation ofprivate shuttle vans outside ofthe
Pedestrianized core area'
5.3 Objective: concentrate the majority of interconnecting fiansit activity
at the periphery of tne Village to minimize vehicular taffic
in pedestrianized areas.
5.3.1 Policy: The Vail Transportation Center shall be the primary
pick up and drop offpoint for public hansit and
Private shuttle vans and taxis'
Goal #6 To lnsure the continued improvement of the vitel operational elements
of the Village.
6.1 Objective:
6.2 Objective:
Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new
development.
Provide for the safe and effrcient frrnctions offire, police
and public utilities within the coniext of an aesthetically
pleasing resort setting.
6.2.1 Policy: Development projects and other improvenents in
Vail Village shall be reviewed by respective Town
departments to identify both the impacts of the
proposal and potential mitigating measures'
The Vail Village Master Plan contains a Parking and Circulation Plan. The Parking and
Circulation Plin recognizes the established pattern ofparking and circulation throughout
the Village. the parking and circulation tytt"- it an important element in maintaining the
pedestii;ed charaoterof the Village. Tiis is to be accomplished by limiting vehicular
access at strategic points, while allowing for necessary operations such as bus service,
loading/delivery and emergency access.
The Gasthof Gramshammer is in many ways unique. The hotel was built in the center of
the Village prior to the adoption of zoningin Vail and the formulation of and adoption of
the Vail Vitiag. Master Plan. As discussed in the background section of this
memorandurnl the vail Tovm council approved a request by the applicant to change an
existing non+onforming use (a surface parking), to another non-confomring use (an
underground partcing structure). the underground parking structure proposed by the
appliclant is disigned to accommodate as many on-site parking spaces as possible. To
-oi.i"" the nr.inber of on-site parking spaoes, the applicant is proposing valet parking'
The applicant is tentatively p*porrog seven to ten valet parking spaces in the undergfound
stnrcture (in addition to the regular spaces).
The Parking and Circulation Plan also discusses pedestrian circulation as a functional
consideration of the plan. A long standing goal for the village has bear to improve the
pedestrian experience through the development of a network of walkways and paths' A
iatn of signincaut importance and identified in various planning documents is the
streamwalk. The streamwalk expansion has been conternplated to be constructed across
the applioant's property to achieve a pedestrian link between the Covered Bridge pooket
park and the Gore Creek Promenade.
A Building Height Plan is an element of the Vail Village Master?lan. The goal of the
Building fr"ight fho is to maiotain the concentration of low-scale buildings in the core
area of the Village, while positioning taller buildings along theVillage's northern
periphery. eccording to itt" n"laiog Height Plan, the Gasthof Gramshammer is located in
an area of the Village"intendea upon traving buildings with a maximumrange of 34 stories
in height. A story is defined in the Plan as nine feet of height, not including the roof'
Lastly, the Vail Village Master Plan defines tsn sub-areas within the Village Core area'
rhe iurpose of defini-ng the ten sub-areas in the plan is to identifli and be sensitive to the
opportunities and consiaints that may exist on a site specific basis. The ten sub-area
concepts are meant to serve as advisory guidelines for land use decisions by the PEC and
the Town Council.
The Gasthof Granshammer is located in sub-areas #3-6 and #3-7. The opportunities for
development identified in sub-are a#3-6 xecommercial expansion on the west side of the
Gastlrof Gramshanrmef. The intent of the commeroial expansion is to improve the
enclosure proportions ofthe Children's Fountain area and to enhance the existing plaza
with greenspace. The opportunities for sub-area #3-6 have special emphasis on plan
objectives 2.2, 2'4, 2.5, 2,6, 3.1, 3.2, 3'3' 4.1'
Sub-area #3-7 is identified as the Village Steamwalk Study Area. The area is identified
as an area to study the opportunities ofa low-impact, walking-only path along Gore Creek
between the Covered eridge and Vail Road, conneoting to an existing streamrralk, frrrther
enhancing the pedeshian network throughout the Village and providing public access to
the creek. The specific design and location of the walkway shall be sensitive to adjacent
uses and the creek environment Special emphasis shall be given to plan objectives 3.4
artrd4.2.
VI. DISCUSSION ISSUES
since this is a worksession, staffhas not prepared a formal recomme'ndahon conceming
the proposed major exterior alteration request. However, the staff has identified the
fottowing issues which we would like to discuss furthu with the PEC and the applicant:
l0
l.Impacts on the 100-year Floodplain
The applicant's properly is impacted by the 10O-year floodplain' Ap-proximately
2,62fsquare fe;t oith; applioant's property is in.the floodplain of Gore Creek'
This area is considered unbuildable by ihe Municipal Code. P*rsuant to Section
18'69.040oftheMunioipalCode,inpart,..noshuctureshallbebuiltintheflood
iur^ar*"(100-year n*aprui"i . ihis inoludes cantilevered areas of buildings
and stairways'
The applicant is proposing to constnrct two TtTgt stairways in or cantileverd
ono tir" 100-year floodpto:in. The applicant shall be required to remove those
portions of the building proposed in the floodplain'
In addition to the encroachment upon the floodplain, the applicant is proposing to
build right up to the 50'Gore creek stream setback (oenterline). Thestaff would
.equest-that ihe PEC provide direction to the applicant as to whether increased
distances from the centerline of the creek should be maintained to reduce the
negative impacts on the sfeam discussed in the Environmental Impact Assessment.
Environmental Impacts
A preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment has been prepared on behalf of
the applicant by Design workshop, Inc. Aocording to the information contained in
the report, most ortne potential environmental impacts resulting from the hotel
addition to the Gasthof Gramshammer will be temporary in nahre and are a result
of construction activities. Minor temporary impacts may fall within the following
areas:
. Decreased water quality, increased erosion, runoff, and sedimentation'
. Decreased air quatrty.
' Disturbed aquatic and terrestrial environments'
' Heightened noise levels.
Environmental impacts caused by the completed project are most likely in the area
of water quality, groundwater, air quality, and biological resources'
-
More
sipifioa't impacfs rnay be associated with vehicular oirculation, parking, and
viiual quality irro"r. iotential impacts which may result from the completed
project include:
. slight reduction in available parking forthe Gasthof Gramshammer's
guests'. StighttyincreasedvehiculartafficinVailVillage'. Restricted senrioe and delivery areas and access'
. Removal of several mature conifers in the steam setback'
,)
ll
3.
According to the report, these impacts can be addressed by the impleme'utation of
mitigatioi measures including protective grosion control' construction
man-agement practices, a teeiiotection plan' an on-site faffrc management plan
and revegetation ofthe streambank area'
Staff would like to discuss the issues addressed in the Environmental Impact
Assessment with the applicant and the PEC to better understand the mitigation
measures and identifu iny opportunities for cbanges' Staffis particularly
concerned with tLe i-pac* to the steam bank and the proposed ranoval o.f three
maturesprucetrees.AcopyoftheEuvironmentallmpactAssessmenthasbeen
attached for reference.
Loading/Delivery/Parking
The applicant is proposing an undergrountl parking structwe to accommodate the
existini parking neeis Ot-tne Cas*rof Gramshammer, The legal, non-confomting
status ofthe existing surface parking area and the C;ouncil's approval granting a
change in non-confinning use does uot permit thc additional parking demands,
resutlng from the hotel Jdition, to be met on-site. The additional parking need
resulting from the constnrction of the hotel addition shall be met through pay-in-
lieu intJthe Town parking Fund, as required pursuant to Section 18.52 of the
Municipal Code.
currently, no loading and detivery area is desipated on the applicant's pfopefty.
1.ne Uading and delivery of goods at the Gasthof Gramshammer takes place on
Gore Creek Drive. The uses-proposed in the hotel addition generate the need for
one loading and delivery berth on-site. A loading and delivery berth is not
proposed by the apPlioant.
The staffwould request that the applicant and PEC discuss the need for loading
and delivery and w|ere it should bi located if it is deemed to be necessary. Staff
would also request that the PEC antl applicant discuss the appropriatencss of
constucting a cenfal hash facility for use by the applicant and thrc busincsses in
the adjaoeJCreekside Condominiurn Building and the Covered Bridge Building.
Zoning and Development Standards
The applicant's proposal deviates from four ofthe required development
standards. They are:
. Landscape Area - rcduction of landscape area by approximately 200 square
feet.. Site Coverage - over by approximately 6l square feet'
4.
l2
. Density - over by sne dutslling unit.
. LoadinglD"li"""y - one berthls required and no berth is proposed.
lnadditiontotheabovedescribeddeviations,thepr,oposedbuildingheightmay
exoeed rhe reqoiJ OOI+O building height requirernent prescribed in the Vail
Village Urban DesiP Guide Plan.
Staffwould like to discuss the above-described deviations with the applicant md-
the pEC to uoO."rta"Jno* tn"r" issues will be addressed prior to final review of
the major exterior aPPlication.
STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
Sincethis is a worksession, no formal staffrecomme,lrdation will be provided at this time'
However, stalf requests tt ut tn" abovelisted issues be discussed with the applicant, so the
applicant'can r"..i.ro" specific direction on how to proceed with the proposgd hotel
addition and nrinor subdivision. If the applicant wishes to receive final PEC review of this
major exterior alteration and minor robdilritioo t"quest, at the June 23, 199.7 PEc
-""*iog, all revised information must be provided io staffno later than 5:00 PM, Monday'
June 9. 1997.
l3
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER HOTEL ADDITION
SQUARE FOOTAGE ANALYSIS
o
o
Fioor
Levels
Common Area -
Square Footage
Commercial Area -
Square Footage
Accommodation
Units - Square
Footage
Dwelling Units -
Square Footage
Parking Area -
Square Footage
Total - Square
Footage
Parking
Level
172 sq. ft.4,308 sq. ft.5,080 sq. ft.
lst Floor 3,684 sq, ft.622 sq. ft.956 sq. ft.5,262 sq. ft.
2nd Floor 651 sq. ft.2,040 sq. ft.2,691sq. ft.
3rd Floor 504 sq. ft.415 sq. ft.1,692 sq. ft.2,611 sq. ft.
TOTAL 5,611sq. ft.622 sq. ft.3,411 sq. ft.1,692 sq. ft.4,308 sq. ft.15.644 so. ft.
F:\EVERYONE\GEORC|E\OASTGRAM.SQF
\
\
q,
ill'
I'ttIFDz
.I
:i::; :iii :i! ifir
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER
ADDlTlON
. - - :- :i
--r-a a i". !i- ,l-:-i i!:: ::E :rai t':ii;::=; :i. !i!t :i1!ir.t-t a tta !.:.r: ijl!--! :i :..a - . jj ! !
NOIIJCIOV
u3t{t{vHshlvug Jorilsv9
I
zl
$l
FI(lr(Jll
€h-1"
T'
i
I
*J
n
d
1v
n
+le:i
at
@bS*(lt
$h-$i
I
I
I
!?7'
!
d
--t _- _ _t\-,._
t-----t \_-_
,r-_tv\
/ t-/t
.t+^tN:!
tf,Ja
?t
t
-rt
r
E
-P
rli /
,:ll /
9F't
I
!
7/># i'-,l= /r
t>tf
lsl'sIt
l="llr
T
-\
_i
/.,t
lIli!;
i. -l II "i | /
l*r: 6 //
li,gl.iL n
;r':-'\
,/i '' { '"'\
t\\
\- \,'. ,.,.rh-- /\.
t/
'r/
]t .
tltt
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER
ADDITION :iri; fi' ;ii :ri:
Lt+: :ii {!; r!:!:NOtUccv
uShrh{vHshlvug lot{ls1/9
-\-'.
\_
--\il
z2'=>+-'
'8
.!t'-- -:.><)-.-.\
--.-.
-\:r >-r-- ----.-.------ ---._,-.,-
-.--\*
,ii iS,:1,,trr
$ iFi rir
5 -i- :--
.. . l- t-
it+: :!i riii !:iit NOTIXI(II/
tctt{rll}tst{vu9 lofrlsvt)
I
1r
I/fl',f,
Fl,
El!
{ - . :- 3 i
!:.'#i ii: riii tiii:a i'j: !ir r::i !:!:i, - i Jr t I
NO|ltq(Iv
u3lthwHshrvu9 JoHISVS
,, 1t/ EYgl
f,
fili
tt
:.t[{
l...*..-'-t I r*t:-'-:-t'tI tr !;
:'t
\/
I__i
rlx;tH +I's lFtrE
l={
I
Iolgl
$w
t\-. ! af''i i
GASTHOF GRAMSHAII{MER
ADDMON ;i:li ;ii; ;ii il{F
GASTT{OF GRAMSHAMMER
ADDrTlON :i:i; ;ii; ;i: ;FiF
r . - :. : ;
:ii:; :;! ii!: i:ii:-lTi iii ;,1; .r;r::
!j
NOTIJGCV
u3l{hwHshlwg JoHLSVg
oFrLr
coPI
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-213V479-2139
FAX 970-479-2452
Department of Community Development
March 18. 1997
Kurt Segerbcrg
Pierce, Segerberg & Associatcs
1000 South Frontage Road, Suitc #300
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: The Parking.Situation at the Gasthof Gramshammer
Dear Kurt,
Thc staff has complctccl a prcliminary rcview of thc plans submittcd by your officc for the
proposcd major cxtcrior altcration to thc Casthof Gramshammcr. Upon complction of our
review, thc staff has dctcrmincd that thc proposcd undcrground parking structurc docs not
comply with thc Municipal Codc of thc Town of Vail.
Thc staff s intcrprctation of the Municipal Codc, as it rclates to parking, is that thc rcmoval of thc
cxisting lcgal, non-conforming unstructurcd (surfacc) parking, and thc subscqucnt construction of
an undcrground parking structurc, constitutes a change in usc, and thcrcforc, thc propcrty must bc
brought into compliancc with thc dcvclopmcnt rcgulations prcscribcd in the Municipal Codc.
The Gasthof Gramshammcr is located in thc Commcrcial Corc I (CCl) Zone District. According
to the parking regulations outlincd in Scction 18.24.180 of thc CCI zonc district, in part,
"...no parking shall bc providcd on-site."
Instcad, property owners in thc CCI zone district shall be required to contribute to the Town
Parking Fund,
The surface parking arca that currently exists at the Gasthof Grarnshammcr is considered a legal,
non-conforming use by the staff. According to Chapter 18.64 of the Municipal Code,
"The use of a site lawfully established prior to the effective date of the adoption of the
Municipal Code which does not conform with thc use regulations of the CCI zone district
may be continued, provided that no such non-conforming use shall be enlarged to occupy
a greater site area than it occupied on the effective date ofthe adoption ofthe Code'
{g *"n"uoru",
Additionally, a rcduction in sitc arca occupicd by a non-conforrning usc shall be dccmcd a
ncw limitation. and thc use shall not thcrcaftcr bc enlargcd to occupy a grcatcr sitc arca
than thc ncw limitation."
Furthcrmore, thc Municipal Codc idcntifres a distinction bctween privatc or public unstructured
off-sheet vehicle parking and privatc or public off-strect vchicle parking structures. This
distinction is made in Scctioni 18.34.02a1 and 18.34.030 of thc Municipal Codc, as unstructurcd
fatking is a permitted use, and structurcd parking is a conditional usc, in the Parking Zonc
birU.i. This is similar to the way the Codc identifics a distinction bctwcen passivc outdoor.
recreation as a pcrmitted usc, and activc outdoor recrcation as a conditional use, in the Outdoor
Recreation Zone District. Each is a typc of outdoor rccreation, however, as a land usc, each
differs greatly.
ln light of thc current legal, non-conforming parking situation, !t1ff hal identificd several
alteiativcs you may *iit to pursue with regard to thc Gasthof Cramshammcr. They are:
l. Rcdcsign the projcct eliminating thc undcrground parking structurc and thc non-
conforming ur" of tn. cxisting surfacc parking arca and pay into thc Town Parking Fund,
2. Appcal the intcrprctation of thc staff to thc Planning and Environmental commission in
accordancc with Scction 18.66'030 of thc Municipal Codc'
3. Appcar beforc thc Town Council with a requcst for a changc of non-conforming use.
According to Scction 18.64.080 of thc Municipal Codc'
,, a non-conforming usc shall not bc changcd to anothcr non-conforming usc unlcss
permission is granied by thc Town Council. Prior to granting such pcrmission, thc
Council shall lctcrmin" tttut th. proposcd usc does not substantially diffcr from thc
cxisting non-conforming use in terms of compatibility uith thc charactcrof thc
area in which it is locatcd, and the Council shall dctcrminc that the proposed usc
docs not incrcasc or aggravatc thc dcgrec of non-conformity cxisting prior to any
such change ofuse'"
Ifyou choosc not to redcsign the project and eliminatc the skuctured parking, I would suggest
that you appeal the staffs interprttotion ofthe parking situation prior to_appearing bcforc thc
Town Council with a requcst for a change in non-conforming use. The Planning and
Environmental Commission will makc a detcrmination of whether a parking structurs differs as a
land use from unstructured parking. If the Planning and Environmental Commission upholds the
staff s interpretation and determines that there is a difference in land use' you may then wish to
appear before the Town council with a request for a change in use. If the Planning and
Environmental Commission ovcrturns the itaffs interpretation, may then proceed with the major
exterior alteration as ProPosed'
I have tentatively schedulcd an appeal ofthe staffs interpretation ofthe parking situation at thc
Gasthof Gramshammer on the Plinning and Environmental Commission agenda for April 14'
xc:
1997. Should you choose to appcal thc stafPs intcrprciation, I will nccd to know, in writing. by
no later than noon, MondaY, March 3 | ,
Should you havc any qucstions or conccrns regarding thc information addrcsscd in this lettcr'
,please do not hcsitate to call. You can reach mc most easily at479-2145.
Sincerely,
Qu-*r^a
Bob Mclaurin, Town Managcr
Tom Moorhead, Town Attorney
Mike Mollica, Assislant Director of Community Developmcnt
diil;R'ffi
ti o
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
April 14, 1997
An appeal of an administrative decision regarding Section 18.64'040 (Non-
Conforming Uses), stating that private and public unstructured off-street parking
is a different land use than private and public structured off-street vehicle
parking, and therefore, an existing legal non-conforming use may not be
" continued.
Appellant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt Segerberg
Planner: George Ruther
SUBJECT PROPEFTY
Gasthof Gramshammer, located at 231 Gore Creek Drive/on a part of Lot A, Block 5-D'
Vail Village First Filing.
STANDING OF APPELLANT
The staff believes the appellanl has standing to file this appeal as the appellant' Pepi
Gramshammer. is the owner of the Gasthof Gramshammer and is the operator of the
existing, surface parking area.
BACKGROUND
On February 24, 1997, Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt Segerberg of Pierce'
Segerberg & Associates Architects, submitted an application for a major_exterior
alterationln Commercial Core 1 and a minor subdivision to the Communily Development
Department for review. Upon preliminary review of the proposed major exterior alteration
application, it was determined by staff that the removal of the existing, legal, non-
cbhforming, unstructured (surface), off-street parking area and subsequent construction
ol a structured off-street parking area constituted a change in use, and therefore' the
property must be broughiinto cbmpliance with the development regulations prescribed in
the Municipal Code.
?co, u-lra' ZO' E spa3g5 6-l (*-Etuop)
ll.
ilt.
6*r.r. a.pge',
Itrl . Og6zfucAf
&,c-'c,..
^et\, . {0- o.w'. ,,,6w ..n& "
'.\' ,F
OitrC . 4.rggc31r3
Td^.t.. swgroer
6"q M. 5r.,pgoer
,r
lv.
The Gasthof Gramshammer is localed in the Commercial Core 1 (CC1 ) Zone District.
According to the parking regulations outlined in section 18.24.180 of the cc1 zone
District, in Part,
"...no parking shall be provided on-site."
Instead, property owners in the CC1 Zone District shall be required to contribute to the
Town Parking Fund.
The surface parking area that currently exists at the Gasthof Gramshammer is considered
" fegli, non-iontoril'ing use. According to Chapter 18.64 of the Municipal Code'
,,The use of a site lawfully established prior to the effective date of the adoption of
., the Municipal Code whiclr does not conlorm with the use regulations ot the CCI
Zone District may be continued, provided that no such non-conforming use shall
-
be enlarged to o6cupy a greater'site area than it occupied on the effective date of
the adoftion of the C6de. Additionally, a reduction in site area occupied by a non-
conforniing use shall be deemed a n6w limitation, and the use shall not thereafter
be enlarge-d to occupy a greater site area than the new limitation'"
Furthermore, the Municipal Code identifies a distinction between private or public.
unstructured off-street vbhicle parking and private or public off-street vehicle parking.
.
structures. This distinction is made ii Sections 18.3ri.020 and 18.34.030 of the Municipal
Code, as unstructured parking is a permitted use, and structurp,d parking is a conditional
use in the Parking Zoni Oistrict. This is similar to the way the Code identifies a
distinction between passive outdoor recreation and active outdoor recreation aS a
permitted use. in thd Outdoor Recreation Zone District. Each is a type of outdoor
recreation, however, as a land use, each differs greatly.
NATURE OF THE APPEAL
The appellant is appealing the administrative (staff) decision regarding..the change in use
of an bh-site veniitb parking area at the Gasthof Gramshammer. As discussed
previously, the appeliant is -proposing to remove an existing non-conforming surface
parking area in the commercial core 1 zone District and replace it with a new
irnderjround parking structure. The appellant contends that the use of the prope.rty will
not bdchanging witn the construction oi the parking slructure. The appellant believes
that there is no-distinction between structured and unstructured off-street parking as a
land use. and therefore, the PEC should allow the legal, non-conforming status of the
property for on-site parking to remain.
The appellant further contends that the existing legal non-conforming use will be reduced
as a rbiutt of the major exterior alteration. Currenlty, there are cunently approximately 20
parking spaces withih a 6,400 square foot area. Upon completion of the remodel' the
bnclos-ed'part<ing area will compiise approximately 4,232 square feet and accommodate
15 vehicles.
Staff acknowledges that the proposed change in use would most likely improve the
overall appeararice of the Viflagb by enclosing the parking area and screening the
vehiclesiiom public view, how6ver, aestheticl are not relevant to this appeal- What is
relevant in thii appeal is whether surface parking ditfers as a land use from structured
Parking.
J.
v.ACTION REOUESTED
The PEC is requested to uphold/uphold with modificatisns/overturn the staff's
administrative decision t"glrJing ilt" non-conforming parking situation' as it relates to the
Gasthof Gramshammer.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The community Developmenl Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission uptroiO the slaff's administrative decision stating that.the
removat of the existing legal, non-conforming unstructured (surface parking, and the.
"rUiequ.nr "onstrr.tion
6iin'rnO"tg.und-parking structuie, constitutes a change in
,ie, atiO therefore, the property musibe broirght into compliance with the development
regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose tq lphold the staff's
administrative deciJion, the staff would recommend that the PEC make the following
findings:
1. That private and public unstructured (surface) off-street vehicle parking is a
different land use than private and public structured oft-street vehicle parking'
of the existing legal, non-conforming unstructured
<iao.area at the Gasthof Gramshar111rgLsn*tlr*
lv.
constitutes a ch
development regulations prescribed
vehicle parking area,
be brought into
Code.
street veh
construction of an und
or.\s
f:bverlons\pec\menros\pePi's.4 l4
7'..'
Ff L t c0Py
g. A request for an appeal of an administrative decision regarding Section 18.64.M0 (Non-
Confbrming Uses), stating that private and public unstructured off-street parking is a
different land use than private and public structured off-street vehicle parking' and
therefore, an existing legal non-conforming use may not be continued.
Appellant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Pierce, Segerberg & Associates.
Planner: George Ruther
O George Ruther gave an overview of the appeal.
Greg Motfet clarified the appeal by omitting tinding #2.
Kurt Segerberg, representing the applicant, made a presentation.
George Ruther explained fiat the code provided reliel for this type of change of use.
Greg Moffet asked lor any public comments.
Galen Aasland said he supported the staff memo.
Ann Bishop said the request should be granted and commended, as aesthetics are always
relevant anO the Gramshammers should be commended for parking underground.
Diane Golden asked why no parking was allowed on-site.
Susan Connelly said because Vail Village was a pedestrian village.
Diane Golden said she thought the PEC would have to uphold the staff recommendation and that
the applicant would have to go before Council.
Gene Uselton asked if there was a time limit on non-comforming uses-
George Ruther said there was no amortization period.
plenning a1d Envirommental Comnussron
Minules
Apdl 14, 1997 L0
_-!
Gene Uselton said in a sense, it would reduce the number of vehicles in the Village'
John Schofield said that this was a Council issue.
Greg Amsden asked staff if underground parking conflicted with the Master Plan.
George Ruther said that code specified that no paking was to be provided on-site and that staff
didn't dlsagree with the aesthetics.
Greg Amsden asked if a change in the zoning would be a benefit.
Mike Mollica suggested that the applicant could appear before Council and request a change in
the non-conforming use.
Greg Amsden said he supported the staff recommendation.
Greg Moffet said that it couldn't be more clear as the PEC was appointed as a quasi-judicial.
uoaio ano that the interpretation didnt give the PEC a lot of wiggle room.. The code compelled
tne pec to uphold the dtatt's decision. -He said for the use to be changed, the elected folks
would have to reivew the request.
John Scholield made a motion to uphold the statf recommendation with the deletion of the
second finding.
Gene Uselton seconded the motion.
O The motion passed by a vote of 6-1, with Ann Bishop opposed.
plenning md Environmedal Commission
Minutes
April 14, 1997 11.
TOWNOFVATL
REQUIRDD FOR FILING A}{ APPEAL OF A STAFF, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OR
PLANNING AND ENVIROI{MENTAL COMMISSION ACTION
A.AcrroN/DEcIsIoNBEINGAPpEALED: we are appealing the Tov staff 's interDretati on
that a covered parking structure can not be built on the site.e currenE parKl ng
is consldered le - non-conformins. Thls appeal ls based on the premise that
the Gasthof Gramshammer could not exist without continuj"ng its on-site parking
needs .
B.
c.
DATE OF ACTION/DECISION:
NAME oF BoARD oR pERsoN RENDERING rHE DECISIoNnAKING ACTION: George Rurher
D.NAME OF APPELLANT(S): pepi Gramsharnrner
MAILINGADDRESS:231 East Gore Creek Drive
Sarne
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF APPELLANT'S PROPERTY IN VAIL:Part of Block 58 Vail Village
E.
Flrst Fil
Page I of2
F. Does this appeal involve a specific parcel of land? Yes If yes, please provide the following information:
are you an adjacent property owner? Yes
If no, give a detailed ocplanation of how you are an "aggriwed or adversely affected person." *Aggriwed or
adversely affected person" mgans any percon who will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or
ftrthered by this title. The alleged adverse interest may be shared in common with other members of the
community at large, but shall exceed in degree the general interest in community good shared by all persons,
G.
H.
Provide the names and addresses (both person's mailing address and property's physical address in Vail) ofall
owners ofproperty which are the subject ofthe appeal and all adjacent property owners (including properties
separated by a right-of-way, steam, or other intervening barriers). Also provide addressed and s6mpid envelopes for
each property owner on the list.
On ssparate sheets ofpaper, specify the precise nahre ofthe appeal. Please cite specific code sections having
relwance to the action being appealed-
FEE: $0.00
Page2 of2
March 31. 1997
Mr. George Ruther
Town of Vail
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail. CO 81657
Re: Gasthof Gramshammer Parking Appeal
Dear George,
In following the CCI parking guidelines as outlined in 18.24.180 of the Municipal Code,
we are appealing t}e staffs interpretation of the discontinuance of the parking use on the
Gasthof Gramshammer property (see Section 18.64.070 of the Municipal Code). The
existing parking lot will be covered to allow the expansion and upgrade to the lodge
facility. The covered parking will slightly reduce the existing covered parking by 4 to 5
cars. It will be necessary to maintain on site parking for this remodel effort.
Best regards,
KAS/jod
Pierce, Se8erbert & Associates
Architects, PC., A.l.A.
l.,1ain OfIice
1000 S. Fronuge RoadW
Vail, CO 81657
fox: 970 476 4608
phone: 97O 476 4433
Denver Oftice
l6l7 Wazee Srrcet
JUITE L I
Denver CO 80202
fax: 303 671 7262
phoner 303 623 3355
SEGERBERG &
Kurt A. Segerberg, A.I.AI
f\user\ksegerbcrg\docs\george ruther, march 31, l997.doc
Pierce, Segerberg
o
&Spaeh. Architects
o
P.C . A.I. A.
Gasthof Grannshammer Addition
Part of Lot A, Block 5-B, Vail Village
First Filing, Eagle County, Colorado
*2) Part of Lot A, Block 5-B
*3) Part of Lot A, Block 5-B
4) Lot B, Block 5-B
*5)Lotc&D,Block 5-B
*6) Part of Lot K, Block 5-E
*7) Part of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
*8) Part of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
9) Tract I, Block 5-E
rtindicates stamped envelopes enclosed
Main Office: 1000 South Frontage Road West . Vail, Colorado 81657 . 3O31476-4433
One Tabor Center . 1200 Seventeenth Street. Suite 515 . Denver, Colorado 8O2O2 . 3031623'3355
Legal Description
1) Part of Lot A, and E-I, Block 5-B
Owner and Address
Gasthof Inc.
231 E. Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 81657
C.H. Rosenquist and
P.S. Switzer
231 E. Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado aL657
Sitznark Inc.
1-83 E. Gore Creek
Vail, colorado aL657
Town of VaiI
75 South Frontage Road W
Vail, Colorado aL657
HiIIis of Snowmass Inc.
17o East Gore Creek Drive- VaiI, Colorado 81657
VaiI Associates Inc.
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Colorado 81658
Village Center Assoc.
125 W. Willow Bridge Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
sonnetlp Properties, Inc.
20 Vail RoadVaiI, Colorado 81657
Town of VaiI
75 South Frontage Road W
Vail, Colorado 8L657
o
February 24,1997
Gastof Gramshammer Addition
Part of Lot A, Block 5-B, Vail Village
First Filing, Eagle County, Colorado
*2. Part of Lot A. Block 5-B
*3. Part of Lot A, Block 5-B
4. Lot B. Block 5-B
*5. Lot C &D, Block 5-B
*6. Part of Lot K. Block 5-E
*7. P^rt of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
*8. Part of Lot K and L. Block 5-E
9. Tract I. Block 5-E
* Indicates starnped envelopes enclosed
Pierce, Segerberg & Associares Architects. PC.,A.l.A.
Main Oflice 1000 S. Frontage RoadW Vail,CO8l657 fox:970 476 4608 phone:970 476 4433
Denver Office l6lTwazee Sreet Suite C2 Denver, CO 80202 fox:3O3 6a3 2262 Dhond 303 623 3355
Lesal Descrintion
l. Part of Lot A, and E-I, Block 5-B
Owner and Address
Gastof Inc.
231 East Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 81657
C.H. Rosenquist and
P.S. Switzer
231 East Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 81657
Sitzmark Inc.
183 East Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 81657
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
Hillis of Snowmass Inc.
170 E. Gore Creek Drive
Vail, Colorado 81657
Vail Associates lnc.
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Colorado 81658
Village Center Association
125 West Willow Bridge Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Sonnenalp Properties, inc.
20 Vail Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81657
=-l
t.
A'F
MEMORANDUM
TO: Vail Town Council
FROM: Community Development Departnent
DATE: May 6,1991
SUBJECT: Request for a change of non-conforming use to allow for the constuction of an
undirground parkiig stnrcture at the Gasthof Gramshammer, located at 231 Gore
Creek_Drive/onapartofLotA,Block5.D,VailVillagcFirstFiling.
BACKGROUND
on February 2[,lggT,Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt seger-berg of Pierce'
Segerberg & Associates Architects, submitted an application for a major exlerior
altiration and a minor subdivision to the Gasthof Gramshammer. Upon preliminary
review of the proposed major exterior alteration application, it was determined by staff
that the removal of the exiiting, legal, non-conforming, unstructured (surfaoe), ofGsteet
parking area and subsequent construction ofa structured off-steet parking area
"ottrtiittua
a change in land use, and therefore, the properly must be brougft into
compliance with G development regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code.
The Gasthof Gramshammer is located in the Commercial Core I (CC I ) Zone District.
According to the parking rcgulations outlined in section 18.24.180 of the ccl Zone
District in part,
"...no parking shall be provided on-site."
Instead, property owlrersi in the CCI Zonc District shall be required to contribute to the
Town Parking Fund to meet parking requirements.
The surface parking area that cunently exists at the Gasthof Gramshammer is considered a
legal, non-conforming use since it was lawfully established prior to the effective date of
th! ordinance prohibiting on-site parking in CCl. According to Chapter 18.64 of the
Municipal Code,
..The use of a site lawfully established prior to the effeotive date of the adoption of
the Municipal Code whicl does not conform with the use regulations of the CCI
Zone District may be continued, provided that no such non-conforming use shall
be enlarged to occupy a greater site area than it occupied on the effective date of
the adoption of the bode. Additionally, a reduction in site area occupied by a non-
1
oonforming use shall be deemed a new limitation, and the use shall not thereafter
be enlargJ to occupy a greater site area than the new limitation."
. on April14, lggl,the Planning and Environmental commission upheld ( 6-l Bishop
opposed) an appeal ofan admiiistative decision regarding the applicant's proposal,
finding that,
.A private and public unstructured (surface) off-street vehicle parking rs-a
different land use than private and puflic structured (underground/enclosed) off-
street vehicle Parking
"'
and therefore, the property must be brought into compliance with the development regulations
frescribed in tne Uunicip* Coa", o,. "
.i"nge of non-conforming use must be approved by
the Vail Town Council.
II. pESCRTPTION OF TIrE REQUEST
section 18.64.080 (Change of Non+onforming use) of the Municipal code prescribes a means of
changing one ooo-oooforiring use to another non-conforming use. The appliCant iS requesting
a ctring"e of non-conformini use. The applicant proposes to remove ths ex'sting legal non'
conformlng surface p"*ing-at"" ana reiiace lt uiltn-an underground parking structure (a
non-conforming use).
Pwsuant to Section 18.64.080 of the Municipal Code,
..A non-conforming use shall not be chenged to another non-conforming use unless
permission tras beir granted by the Town Council. Prior to granting suchpermission,
the Council shall determine that:
l.Theproposedusedoesnotsubstantiallydifferfromtheexistingnon-
conforming use in terms of compatibility with the character of the area in
which it is located' and
2.Theproposedusedoesnotincreaseoraggravatethedegreeofnon-
conformity existing prior to any such change of use'
The conceptual building plans have been attached for referenoe'
ill STAFFRECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Town Council spprove'
with conditions, the app'licant's request for a change of non-conforming use at the Gasthof
Gramshrmmer to allow for the construction of an underground (structured) parking Nrea'
Staff recognizcs that the policy of the zoning ordinance is to insure the gradual elimination of
existing n6n-conforming us", *h*.u." potiibt" and practicable. However, staffalso recognizes
that thJzoning ordinance provides u *"urN to review and approve a change of non-conforming
use to another non-conforming use, if the "new" use is deemid apFopriate by the Town Council'
sta.ff believes that the requested change of non-conforming use, while not identical to the existing
use, is similar in nature and that the cf,ange will result in a reduction of the non-oonformity and
therefore, be less detimental to the oharacter of the Village and will not have negative impacts on
the surounding area.
Should the Council choose to approve the requested change of non-conforming use, staff would
firther recommend that the Council make the following finding:
L That the requested change ofnon-conforming use from a surface (unsfuctured)
pa*ingu'"utoanunderground(stucturcd)parkingarea,attheGasthof
Gramsbammer, does not zubstantially differ from the existing non-conforming
surface parking use in terms of compatibility with the character of the Village' nor
does it increasi or aggravate the degree ofsurface parking non-conformity
curently existing atthe Gasthof Gramshammer' W
In fact, subsequent to the following condition, the non-oonformity of on-site parking is
substantially reduced and the character of the Village is enhanced:
Ndl'+o c:(ce+ +-ttr,t/.*/l
?.rUi. &t'enalk |heo'q'h +*d"1 slcu'Lua4'
1.
Q1/l - trq 4heno & Wee.
5-l
That the maximum nurnber of on-site vehiole parking spaces at the Gasthof
It--. l\ rv'>
n
\l
T
{l:l
'l-
-\ -:\,\ '\
.'l t qJ
+irl-:r n -'!
,. _- *:1
^i ^{tr+ r4T^
r r.:Zi-$('
.'{'
';\
/
fll+xi^rr [*oa *<,;t*ste.
3ctbt?- AL.-e A-t"A 5o.rl-h 6;*- o€ boeE CoA -
tk \b iltoPz {h"-' & 2o '
{orn 6herutEul
o
FILT COPT
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2 I 38/479-2 I 39
FAX 970-479-2452
Department of Comrnunity Developtnent
Junc 16, t997
Kurt Scgerbcrg
Picrcc, Scgcrbcrg, Architccts & Associatcs
1000 South Frontagc Road Wcst
Vail, Colorado 81657
Rc: Gasthof Gramshammcr Exlcrior Altcration and Minor Subdivision
Dcar Kurt,
I havc complctcd a rcvicw of thc Gasthof Gramsharnmcr cxtcrior altcration and minor subdivision
rcqucsts. Thc rcvicw includcd looking ovcr the minutcs from tho workscssion mccting with thc
PU'C on May 12, 1997. You nccd to addrcss thc following itcms:
Plcasc submit building height calculations. l'hc calculations must indicatc that thc
proposcd plans conform with 60/40 building hcight rcquircmcnts'
\Mift$p' Thc maximum dcnsity allowctl on thc sitc'-'@
4\q 4'
&
*
dt'
dl.
8.
9.
4\q o
11 5.
6.
As a result of thc discussion with the PEC, plcasc rcmovc allportions of thc building from
- thclO0-ycarfloodplain. tN6 fuifi, tlulUtuq.Cotwz--Tffpti-pisal currcntly cxceeds site covcragc by sixty-one square fcct. Pleasc reduce the
squarc footagc to conform with the site covcragc rcquircments'
Plcasc rcdcsign thc underground parking structurc to conform with the drivc irVdrive out
requircment. The maximum number of spaccs allowed in the structurc will bc twenty'
5hor/ n{4{riut ftror*a.
Pleasc submit a trcc prescrvation plan as rcquestcd by thc PEC'
As rccommended in the Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessment, plcasc prcparc
and submit a wetland analYsis.
The Public works Department requcsts a sitc specific floodplain analysis.
please show the existing building footprint and planterp on the site plan.
{g r""r"urru",
Y{;li 3ji"i
gL|0.Atwcnty-twofootwi<|cdrivcaislcisrcquircdtothcparkingstructurc.
v
)k
Plcasc submit a proposcd staging plan for construction'
plcasc show how trash pick up and loading/dctivcry will takc placc' M. 116 tF ,
* tt'Thc Firc Dcpartmcnt does not pcrmit a combination storagc room/mcchanical room
pursuant to thc UFC.
14. fndicatcthetrashroomonthcplans. NO 6FAJ +9l#/'1 @+-t
i S. Whcrc is thc sccond exit from thc sccond lcvcl of the new building into thc existing
building? \lfill C{{.l- rniL€. }.lcq€a
l(.,. A firc sprinkler and fire dctection systcm is requircd. Thc existing building may also need
to bc sprinklered depcnding on the code rcview. Plcase submit plans of thc existing
building.
17. Elcvators will nccd Phasc ll rccall and cnclosurcs.
I f you havc any qucstions, plcasc do not hcsitatc to call. You can rcach me at 479'2145 '
Sinccrcly,
fr. ^y-R.'-+a^4
Ccorgc Ruthcr
Town Planncr
, VAIL PUBLIC hloRKs A,5O.saZSZte6U
HnRSei 14:10 No .004 P.02
Community Devclopment Plan Routing Forur
a[j0,,tg 261997
Approved X Denied (cite detailedreasons) .-. .Approved with conditions
lbuted To: (Sheg llall, Public Works)
Tcrfr MiFtinez; I\rbHC Works
Mike McGec, Fire
Rcturn To:Gcorge Ruther, Conununity Development
Datc Routcd:zlaLtv
RetumBy:alslqt
Projcct Name:6tsw ht$fit7hv,r4,'+cre Apor'ltoJ
Projeot Addrcrs:Ul 6, hoee. r'apsk-aaivd
Projcct Lcgal:hara t rr A tt 58 v.\, tjts Fll,'.",
Project Descriptim:
VA*1oa d,ru-toe. *lla*a'orl
a
a
ea
@
Aite 'ru^rf,., {rqrl Pt(-rn ,.tlcilrtq!5 -ir*,-.al Lw,dcrp r,lrpp {ls fa4ta+ |rc,
rrilsi( dra hortduq.,.ratrt lo tl? €drc, c, liv,, (wrl 6161v1 (un flv & "rith thc tlAn!€ll - ^o(,')(1tt^)(n'ffr./'fi -{Fe- {iqpcl I uln t. ;
sr\bw tYE e*r*lnq, u'sirdrhq;6 granr\tY f cfllt'E lrtrt o\cr|r6lr \e,'f6 \^f{ \E,o{/l#6 tr, ttE, lbrr-A nc^arg\
rotni tp,sde€rxrqh ortl?tg livflatt(yi Qto rr.,fprl ktf . (*n ZZ')
v(\
\.ro &\l atlarc qtocred rrf,.tlpF fi;(rt 10t5.
L.ra AtO
5Orr, nrrntr,gg? W$b 'vracccssrbtg. .rcpa(errrxnhrg l4hdz \$)o4rrnolqe|oofoF- - E .nft{":g
Yoy clrioo rlLwrilttr $h.rr{3 hd a mr'u,Yutn or?Ar {.7\. Vrrrcf,-
4lirrnr:lcc,.rtz*.**r*"* q}{',,#b.ffinufM^ -.Fw4mlM
lgnthaglrc,hne Vrr^l6t1c\ odtrgn-otrr.rd trrflliq aitte Cogl ,r,OC ( srrrsurfl fe$xrrerrcd)
" on br.d4 e zyrsag5-tuk da,d[{in6 rn{mHEIt - '
I hmA ls Rra c^-ei,.kr. okt* {lo rrtrrnqeA s*ooir^.o
SraDfrdkah glgrt(&
'",o.oB.{,
+)
5!uur afeeC64 \her6 to4rtrryl anddrrive{ r^rrtl bo&; Pn8.
Rcviewedby:Date:
f:Uroryltr*'ldfi \tur{odn
Community Development Plan Routing Form
Routed To:Greg Hall, Public Works
Terri Martinez. Public Works@
Retum To:George Ruther, Community Development
Date Routed:zlzelqt
Return By:s l< lqt
ProiectName:h*arr€ he,tl-*<hn n'n"z rl-"hJ
Project Address:731 6. hez /aer uL.
Project Legal:tar ^tr lr'r'. A ?,t <B \/ \/. lsf
Pdect Description:
tvl/1oz e/,r: *ltailAbJ
Approved Denied (cite detailed reasons)/ Approved with conditions
I l+o.ar'-rz,;zrJ UJxL2vt<aL .r
dF<.
q az/no-/aJ,t' ,t aut/, P"orrt ,'
.t-, Z { eprf ,,/^r-t /onZe 2 /t z.//Je/4vQ t 6-o 17 zp>,.'.7'b2 | lPa/si7"'/
1 Fztz- 5)r-2..,,/ uryzL .?/k/ /r.r- .t6 Zc;zo.u /zftaz-m'l J?J-tz*r c,<k
.zt"t*-/a.t(/,€z a 6n/.il/4r j C/-/1
a--Jo Zo-zhzrz' /4Js" d) 4a,,t77-4,ur 44 4<'zz't 4-x-'-
7v7< {roz'+s*-' ts szt & <.---& rr-^u"oor*/.
8, 8"/a'^y+ fo? 41a/./z <- /zo&/t 4 /<'/ ntaC-';/'"* Z-rez<:'a/z| /
4iV./c- E5 5z-trz-z--Q
Reviewed bv ./4.tZ/;--z* Date: 3' 3'2 7
oFttr
copy
o
AT r9fiS,
2. A request for a worksession to discuss a major exterior alteration in CC1 and a minor
subdivision, to allow for the construction of a parking garage, 9 accommodation units' 1
condominium and new retail office space at tne easftriot Giamshammer, located at 231
E. Gore Creek Dr./Part ol Lot A, Block 58, Vail Village 1st Filing'
Applicant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Pierce, segerberg, & Associates
Pianner: @ rnrte YYblliea.
Mike Mollica gave an overview of tne memo. He iaiO regarding the minor subdivision' that the
rilitum teqtirements had been met. He said staff had concerns regarding the exterior
alteration, ad outlined on page 11 of the staff memo and Mike proceeded to go over the
discuSSion issues. He Said [nat st4f was not recommending a variance to encroach into the
ffooOpf"in. glcause of the environmential impacts, staff was encouraging the applicant to do a
wlifdnOs analysis and receive approval from the Corp of Engineers'. He said there was a
qGstd; "i bringing in a fishery b'r wilrllile biologist to determine the impacts and issues of
gro-rnd r"t"i ori tn-e site. He daid a permanenipump to pump out ground.water was a possibility
ind that Russell Forest concurred witn the environm-entai analysis. He said thal parking willte
iifren cire of by pay-in-lieu and that no additional parking will be.on-site. Mike said that staff was
conCereO aOold aiy vehicles backing up the rami into the Children's Fountain area. He said
me ipdrcant could have up to 20 vehicl6s in the parking structure and they need to have a
turnai6und in the structure to Ue able to come out frontlirst, as they would need be coming up a
sieep, IZZ heated ramp. He said that loading was another issue and that presently, loading was
done through the front door.
Kurt Segerberg, of Pierce, Segerberg & Associates, said the dumpster was under the deck by
the entry.
Mike Mollica said a zoning analysis was done on the property and 4-5 issues for discussion were
identified. He said a need had io be shown for them io remove any landscaping 1nd lhat site.
coueiige was over oy oi sq. ft. and density was over by 1. dwelling unit- Mike pointed out that
the pEb needed to discuss'a loading berth, since no loading berth existed now.
Planning and Fnvironmental Commisslon
Minutes
Mav 12. 1997
Kurt Segerberg stated that with regards to the floodplain relative to the building footprint' he
thoughtiantilevering could be done into the floodplain area'
Greg Moffet said that would require a variance and therefore, a hardship would need to be
shown.
Kurt segerberg said relative to the stream setback, the building was designed to meet the
setback.
Mike Mollica said staffs goal was to preserve the large trees down by the creek.
Kurt Segerberg said a wetlands analysis could be done and that the applicant had proposed to
revegetate and put a path for the owner's use, not lor the public., He_ said the owner was not in
favor of a streamwalk. He expiaineO tnai two ditferent schemes for the parking wou.ld allow a 3-
point tutnaround situation. H6 said that a valet situation would have to be managed' He said.the
concern Pepi had regarding the trash, was what.other pgqple would do.it it was a shared facilily
and that Concern would req"uire it to be managed. He said there would be a fence to let
Creekside take care ot tneiliown trash. He siiA ne would like to check the density.number of I
AU's and 1 condo in tne anatysis. kutt Said that now unloading was serviced at the front door'
aswell as the trash, sincJ traln trucks couldn't fit anywhere etse- He said they could.look.into
.
uiing tnJunOerground structure for holding areas wliere deliveries could be made' He said that
the Etaii space-would be eipanOeO and aipa added for the guests. He said there were five
rooms on ihe second tloor ahd two rooms oh tne grO floor, as well as an apartment'
Diane Golden asked if the applicant was providing his managers a place to live.
Kurt Segerberg said a portion of Sheika's would be used for an employee lounge and employee
locker room.
Ann Bishop asked about tre lloodplain issue.
Mike Mollica said the floodplain was treated as if it were a wall lrom the ground up, with regard to
the balconies. NO structures, or portion ol Structures, are allOwed to encroach.
John Schofield said he generally agreed with the staff comments. He said the streamwalk was
in important problem *itn me otn6rs who didn't want it in their own backgro-und, but tl-"1-Y"1{9
find that it woutO be good lor their business, as well as for the Town- He said he was concerneo
with vehicular traffic, since even a slight increase would translate into more traffic throughout the
Village. He said lt was optimiiric to h-ave parking underground, with a not quite valid turnaround.
He was also concerneO with more traffic dround-the fouitain, as it would be exaggerating- a bad
.
prtOter. He said the stream setback and llood setback were sacred issues and that statf needed
to clarify density.
Gene Uselton asked il there was ground water, would the underground parking need to be
abandoned.
Kurt Segeberg said there were ways to handle it, like the vailAthletic club did.
Gene Uselton asked il any variance would be required with a reduction in landscaping'
Planning and Environm ental Commission
Minutes
May 12. 1997
Greg Amsden said he was comfortable with the 50'stream setback and would like to preserve
the trees. He asked if me-patn for G Creekside Building loading, delivery and trash was a 1P/"
grade.
Kurt Segerberg said in an etfort to cooperate with Creekside, they were working together for joint
access and would then remove the wall'
Greg Amsden stated that fill couldn'r be added to the floodplain, as it would wash away' but
f"nOlcaping CoufO Ue aOOeO and trees could be put in. He felt the applicant didn't see an
increased need in roaoing and oeiiverv. Greg diiagreed with John regarding the streamwalk and
ql"iti"""O wnetner a p""O"stri"n path in thailocation, with not much ground between the
iroposed building and creek in a low lying area was a good idea'
Galen Aasland liked the spa for hotel guests and had no trouble with the one nearly-dead tree
Gn; ;fi-;;;o. He saiO that the streimwalk was logical because thg.q9*9t park was lr.tere ary
from-the Town's concept, a Totn streamwalk would be good. He advised the applican-t to come
0""f. *itt a safe parking'scne*e. He thought the floodpiain and stream setback were fine and
n" rnal noiUotndreO Uy-tne Oeniity. He wis in tavor ol a wetlands analysis and advised to solve
ih; irarhp1gbf"* *irnin" neignb6ts. He said he knew Pepiwanted to control his own thing' but
this presented a good opportunity to solve problems.
Ann Bishop said an excellent job was done on lhe memo' She said according to^the goals ..
ouifineO, iney met tne goils in tne Vait Village Master Plan. She said regarding Goal No.3' that
thii was sritt private property inOlne owner-could do what he wanted' She said obviously'
;;;pF h"t;'rsed th'e p'atn inO to work on the trash issue with the neighbor' She said she was
fioibotneieO OV ttt" tdttic that went into that area and hoped this project succeeded'
Diane Golden stated it was tough to have a communal trash, as it was hard to count on the
neighbors being as good as thiapplicant was, so she could understand if it was kept separate'
Shd echoeO thd commissionets oh'the parking being kept safe and that it was a great proiect'
Greg Moffer said in the cc1 when asking for variance, it would be a challelg_e_,P-:loY:...^.. ,.
narOlnip, or that it not be a special privilege. He stated the 50' stream setllacK was tne way rI
was. He said there was no way we'coutd-deny an application for the applicant's failure to provide
a wetlands analYsis.
Mike Mollica Said it would be in everyone'S interest to have the Cotp of Engineers work with the
applicant.
Greg Amsden said lots in East Vail were required to have an analysis'
Mike Mollica said the pEC could require them to have an analysis, but he would be happy to talk
to the Town Attorney.
John schofield said the applicant would be wise to protect themselves. He said in the past' if an
inifysii was not Oone, tne applicant might be asked to contribute to a wetlands fund'
Dominic Mauriello said, according to the code, one ot the factors would be to Say a wetland was
a marsh.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
MaY 12, 1997
o o
Greg Moffet said that children loved to run around the fountain and to make the parking
turnaround work. He said if the applicant was proposing a human solution to the parking iq.sue'
.
there needed to be a way to maf6h enforceable."ne siiO he was in lavor of the streamwalk with
inJOepiJtion oi any tanOicip"O at"a- He thought if the Gramshammers would dedicate the
iiieiniwafx to the iublic, thii mighr be a way tdovercome the landscape loss' Also' he
qreitioneO the valire, in condem'nation, of easements of land in a setback.
Galen Aasland saw merit in Pepi controlling the trash.
Mike Mollica summarized that Galen was ok with the density and that John wanted the applicant
and staff to conlirm the ctensity requirements. He said that the 60/40 root height requirement
may require a variance.
Greg Moffet said regarding density, that several Town policies were in the applicant's.favor' but.
he was still not sure it oveicahe a ipeciatprivilege. Hb suggested showing a hardship and that
it was not a special Privilege'
John Schofield said a clarification was needed regarding the number of units'
Gene Uselton said he had no problem with 5.5 units, but would require showing a hardship on
the 60/40, as well as why it wasn't a special privilege.
Galen Aasland said that density was a benefit to the Town, as long as they were not
condominiums.
Mike Mollica asked if the free-market condo in the project was a non-issue.
Galen Aasland said il there was potential to be sold, then yes, but it didn't appear as if it were
going to be sold.
Ann Bishop said the Gramshammers were encouraging tourism and also that they were living in
the Village and should be applauded.
Diane Golden said she was comfortable with the density.
Planning and Environrnenlal Commission
Minutes
MaY 12, 1997
!t
MINUTES
VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETIN
May 6,'1997
7:30 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
^-.
Ft[ r coP r
A regular meeting of the Vail Town Council was held on Tuesday, May 6, 1gg7, in the Council Chambers of the VailMunicipal Building. The meeting was called to order at approximitely i:30 p.M.
MEMBERS ABSENT:
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT:
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
Sybill Navas, Mayor Pro{em
Kevin Foley
Michael Jewett
Paul Johnston (arrived at 8 p.m.)
Ludwig Kuz
Rob Ford
Bob McLaurin, Town Manager
Pam Brandmeyer, Assistant Town Manager
Tom Moorhead, Town Attornev
The fir.st item on the agenda was Citizen Participation. Dick Peterson, a resident of West Vail, appeared before theCouncil to ask for the town's help in expanding insurance coverage for a town-owned lot adjoining auffenr Creek park.
The land, acquired by the town last year, has Seen used for yearsls an informal dirt track for mountain bike riders. Aftersome initial research, Peterson said he was having Oimcutty working out a way to obtain insurance coverage for thebikers on his own and suggested the town expand its insurance covirage. The Council directed staff to research thematter.
Bill Fleisctrer of Vail Run presented a list of several recommended improvements including: working more cooperativelywith the Colorado Department of Transportation to improve graveling on the North Froitage Roio in the wintertime;pulling weeds from the l-70 underpass retaining walls during th6 summir; adding benches in t6e winter for guests wa1ingto be picked up by private van carriers in Lionshead; and aoding another pay pnone at the Vail Transportation center.
Item number two on the agenda was the First Amendment to Development Agreement for Vail Commons. TownAttorney, Tom. Moorhead presented the item and stated the intent of the amendment was to extend the date forcompletion of the Commercial Component, including the Supermarket and Day Care Component until no later thanSeptember 1 ' 1997. Several items were stated for causing the delays, such as survey discrepancies, extreme weatherin october, 1996 and April' 1997 and difficulties in receiving material deliveries "rt ".gi"""i l;;ign failure. Duringdiscussion, Councilman Michael Jewett continued to voice his opposition to the project. in" .rilirt schedule is asfollows: supermarket opening by May 21, the exterior components of the adjoining retail rental areas completed by June
1.5; employee housing units completed by June 30: and completion of the day care component by June 30. After furtherdiscussion, Sybill Navas made a motlon to approve the amendment and Ludwig Kuz seconded t'he motion. The Councilvoted 5-1 (Jewett against) to amend the development agreement between the iown of Vail and City Market by extendingthe completion date of the commercial component trorir .tuty 1 , lggr , to Sepiember 1, 1gg7.
The third item on the agenda was the reading of ordinance No 9, series of 1997, an Emergency ordinance AmendingTitle 16, Signs to Allow for T|mporlry signage and a special Review Process for Temporary signage Because of the
lves-t va! Interchange Roundabout Construction. MayorArmour read the tiile in full. Town oi vaij stlff members LarryGrafel, Greg Hall, Pam Brandmeyer and Dirk Mason presented the item, stating that they had been contacted bymerchants in the west Vail area advising of .the impacts experienced in doin! businesi due to the roundaboutconstruction. lt was felt.that allowing tempordry signage during this period would help mitigate these effects beingexperienced by the merchants. Paul Johnson mad_e a motion to approve Ordinance tto. g,-lggz, as an emergencyordinance' Ludwig Kuz seconded the motion. The council voted 6-0 to approve an emergency ordlnance that allowsfor the placement of temporary on-site signs, banners, etc., for businesses directly impacteo 6y thl we.t Vail roundaboutconstruction. The measure, which includes a waiver of the town's sign application fees, becomes effective immediatelyand extends to Nov. '1 , 1997.
Fourtt on the agenda was an appeal of an administrative decision determining that the Vail Run tennis bubble, locatedat 10o0 Lionsridge Loop (Vail Run) was a seasonal structure. Town of Vail Planner, Dominic Mauriello presented theitem to the Council, stating that the staff had determined this bubble to be a seasonal struclure, and should be removedduring the summer months' The issue had surfaced when the applicant applied for an amendment to a specialDevelopment District to allow the current tennis courts to be converted to other recreational uses. Larry Eskwith, attorneyfor the applicant, addressed the Council. The applicant, Bill Fleischer-Vail Run operations Manager'was also present.Mr' Fleischer stated his reasons for ailowing the bubble to remain in place year-round. Sybill Naias made a motion tooverturn the staffs decision to remove the bubble, as it was a recreational structure and haO been in place for 20 years.Mike Jewett seconded the motion. Mr. Eskwith stated he would like to present his case to the Council, in the event therequest was denied. After further discussion, a vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
!i!h on the agenda was the first reading of ordinance No. 1 0, Series of 1997, an ordinance amending ordinance No.7' Series of 1995, an ordinance amending Special Development District No. S to remove language requiring recreationalamenities to be tennis facilities. Mayor Armour read the title in full. Town Planner Dominic lr/'aurletto presented the itemand provided the following background: The applicant is requesting to remove the language requiring that the recreationalamenities be tennis facilities so that other recreational uses can be substituted toitirJtennis co-urts. specifically, the
i::*:iil'":xT::$sJ:?il?s"y?":"frs"'ff#"uiilf"?",,"$t:ffi:J(",,fi:t",x'le,J::H:*:ri[x:il1,#
Indoor and.q'rtdoor ncreational facilities, including, but not limited to, swimming pools, tennis courts, handball,
.and
seu1.sh gqurpatlO similar recreational facilities.
The PEC' at its April 28, 1997 meeting, recommended approval (unanimously) of the proposed major amendment subjecito the following conditions:
1. That any proposed changes to non-enumerated "recreational uses' will be evaluated by the staff as a minoramendment to the SDD and be subject to the g SDD review criteria.
2- That any future "recreational use" shall be available to the general public.
The above conditions had been incorporated in the proposed ordinance, and the Staff recommendation was foi approvalof Ordinance No. 10, Series of 1997, on first reading.
Discussion followed and it was agreed that all references to tennis courts only be removed and new language insertedto be include other recreational uses. Paul Johnston made a motion to appiove Ordinance No. 10, Seriesit 1gg7, oifirst reading and Mike Jewett seconded the motion. A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously, 6-0.
The sixth item on the agenda was an update on the Lionshead Redevelopment Master plan. Director of the Town ofVail Community Development Department, Susan Connelly presented the item along with Town Manager, Bob McLaurinand Consultant, Ethan Mo-ore, and provided an update on the Lionshead redevelop-ment master ptanistaff reported onStage Two "Wish List" Submittals and introduced Stage Three: Alternatives Analysis and Selection of 'preferred
iAltemative. Council members_were asked to: 1) approve or modiff the{ist of "Wish Liit" items to be analyzed in StageThree, and 2) approve or modify the proposed Stage Three procels and schedule. The staff recommendation was forapproval of both.
During public discussion, Lucian Layne, a part-time resident of Vantage Point condominiums, asked the Council toremove "wish list" item 153 because, in his words, it would be like giving out a blank check. Response 1 53 suggests,among other things, rezoning the Lionshead parking structure to allow fori wide variety of uses of both private anJiublicnatures. David Corbin, representing Vail Associates, Rob LeVine of Antler's Lodge, and phil Holbert, also a pari-timeresident of Vantage Point, urged ihe Council to retain all wish list items for additional review. Corbin and the othersdisputed Layne's reasoning that response 153 is_inappropriate, reminding the Council that a master ptan is not anapproval for any particular develooment concept. Following up on Corbin's iomment, LeVine said he hoped the masterplan blueprint would include creative incentives for redevelopment so actions could be undertaken within the next fiveyears rather than 10 or 1 5 years down the road. Step three of the process will include studies on physical feasibility andqualitative analysis of the 173 ideas, markeVfinancial feasibility and designation of public view coiriiors, if any. t_uCwigKuz made a motion to approve the list of "wsh List" items to-be analyzJd in stage Three and to approve the proposeiStage Three process and schedule. Kevin Foley seconded the motion. A vote was taken and'the motion passedunanimously, 6-0.
The seventh item on the agenda was a request for a change of non-conforming use of the Gasthof GramshammerUnderground Parking Structure. Town of Vail PIanner, Geoige Ruther presented the item and provided the followingbackground: Pursuant to Section 1 8.64.080 (change of Non-cJnforming Use) of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail,the applicant, Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt Segerberg, is r6questing a change of non-conforming use. Theapplicant proposes to remove.an existing legal non-conforming Jurface'parking area aitne Gasthof Gramshammer inthe Commercial Core lZone District, and subsequently replaceitwith a non-coniorming underground parking structure.George further explained that on April 14, '1 997, the..PEC upheld an appeal of an administratiJe decision relarding theapplicant's proposal, finding that, "A private and public unstructured (su*ace) off-street vehicle p"*ing i" a ditferent landuse than private and public structured (underground/enclosed) off-street vehicle parking,' and, the[fore, the property
must be brought into compliance with the development regulations prescribed in the Muniiipal Code, or a change oinon-conforming use must be approved by the Vail Town Council. The staff of the Community oevetbpment Department
recommended the Council approve, with conditions, the applicant's request for a change oi non-conforming use at theGasthof Gramshammer to allow for the construction of an underground (structured) pJrking area.
During discussion, the applicants told of the many advantages the changes would make to the pedestrian area, includingelimination of snow removal operations (the driveway would be heated), improved ambience ai the children's Fountainlnoise reductions and increased control of the lodge's parking operaiions. Sherry Donrvard, from Design Workshop,presented computer-simulated drawings showing the aesthetic improvements. Tom'steinberg,'a iormer council member,statea' his strong support for the request. Steinberg also asked Council to create a one-ioot-wide public easement
!etw9e1 the parking structure and Gore Creek to complete the streamwalk from the Covered Bridge park to the GoreCreek Promenade and International bridge. In response, Pepi Gramshammer, the applicant, said he would not agreeto such a condition and would not build at all if this were attached to his approval. Pepi further stated that he couldn'trun a hotel without parking and_ in order to compete with other properties, he had to supply additional amenities. He alsostated years ago the pay-in-lieu fee was $3,ooo. He said presenfly the fee was almost $17,000. which he felt wasridiculous.
A motion was made by sybill Navas to approve the request with the conditions as recommended by staff (see attachedmemorandum). Mike Jewett seconded the motion.
Paul Johnston questioned specifying the number of spaces at all and felt this should be hammered out in the nextphase(s) of the approval process for the entire oroject. Paul indicated this was a drastic Jeparture from ccl
1
-''- ) l
restrictions/requirements
"no "nort left to tne P,E-9:.L,:glrliq t<.2 lncicat"fivi ithe pedesii-iar riai,:re r; tire viilage,he would like to see the number of spaces rernoved at this poirit. rne counlit vote,.r 5-1 (Johnston opposect) to approvethe removal of the existing legal non-conforming surface parking area at the Gasthor crl.unirrlilnd subsequentlyreplace it with a non-coniorming underground iarktng structure.
The eighth item on the agenda was the Town Manager's Report. Bob McLaurin updated the council on the public worksseasonal housing proposal. He said that the costs were still being developed, but expressed frustration that costscontinue to increase' He indicated once the final numbers are deveioped, the staff wouid evaluate them and developa recommendation as to how to proceed. This could include proceeding with the project or looking it ott.ru1. alternativesfor addressing the town's se999na] housing needs, Mike Jewett askei how much had already been spent to this point,and Bob responded around $30 - $40,000, for plans that could still be used at a later point in time. He atso indicated thatregardless of whether the Town decides to move ahead with the proposed project, expenses to change the tunnelgeometrics' install the sidewalk through the tunnel, complete slorm sewer site work, re-pave, etc., would probably costthe town $500 - $600,000 anyway and probably should be done. The question was raiied about reduclng the numberof units, and council members agreed that decision would only increase the cost of the units.
B-ob-encouraged council members to register for the annual CML conference to be held in Snowmass June 24 - 22,1997.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at approximatety 10:50 p.m.
,,linutes prepared by [otty Hccutcheon(il/anes of certatn tndtvtduals,"ho gdve plbltc lnput mdy be tndccurate.)
submitted,
Robert W. Armour, Mayor
ATTEST:
cCutcheon, Town Clerk
Jucr
Jrh
. sI .a cradrb. rr-r{ .J
. n90
. f.-dCbf rrb. t*rt
GorG CEGGk Dslv.
tt65,
hrj. lbtl.
!r. .-
!l fl tE-rnt tdbFbr|.j
t{rl.-.trr* dc*rrrh ;xr; lll
ta.-.ltlidl.|ibft- 5.a - bG
s.a rttrch.d 'Erhlblt
-lEa.r-aFr-I-E fvrary firouund (S20, OoO. OO)
-r.aF-**tJrlilSHr-rEHFa. r.a
A'.
OetaZ no tetSZ
EAGLE COI INTY CLERX.
P6 loFe
COLORADO
REC
1C. ee 2.
-lt-tltrd*rrE .
,. tCtnta tl f d ra.arL h Hn-iJ ltitEtr .rrt! Sit-|. r b -Fir ftrrr*l, d tb Erbt rJ
iUd-r --.& d r..l-ri ri.l-r-a tiar t|ioa. d.! *.r-. rtal. *t.lcr..t a..d ad lt-fir-6.
t-.1 rt h b r ait, d, L rra r ||. &. l-trh,a
'rrr-rr.
rl| h tu d tF-.
l\O lLvt L'&f0 t|(tl.D frL D.!il,.rdc frfld -a 5.rtra irttu ltir-r. -- t rr[ Lta bird
raFfr* Ad|Frrrrfr ltfClfra I lta t-r-aFF-trrirr.tF.a'lr ffi. F!.hqrt -al|-rd.tl-t-t ilt friid rirr. a..a |tr.iij*.--t alatiGt.aacF-rr, thrt lt lf dild .a rb tirar.! .a- .-riFa, f- F.a. rrt. Fitrr. .lii* d i.aft- a .r- d titr-. h Lr, h &. rli3a.. rab ldtlt( rb! F.tdd..ft bt'i. b-ti. -I ia.art*.r* ir Ed Lr-|hr.|. r.ath tL-r rr haratbi-ilr|-ad-|rn.ha.L.rrlr.tr*ti.r. rrsr..-!r-r.. rlrrLrbjrbFtlrt-EE
r.t artctrtrr rtjhtr-of-rry. rca.Fvrtlooc rnd tlrtrlctlvc ccrTcoant! of tccord.
.lncludlag bug aot ltrltrd to thc Gr."i€nt rnd rtlht-of-ny of Gorr Crccll rad
rd vrlorcl trrct for 1990 rnd rubr;qucnc ycrre.
d -rt bfff F-.r hrhir -a FAa. FFb.a* t*tit ItA bitd-ia-..'-t.I d.<7F-
F- Ht d..i3 - b .h th t|EL q -t F d.rc( r*t.t Jrat d ri0 nrt.Axt Ar{D FOIEVEf DEFErD.
fa lllfel3 wllElgF. it tr-trl b.-.-a || da* - Er h &.
DOlSolI IROmER-c.
st^tE (t (ltflAF
rcrd ErSlr
Tf brpfj iltFr E rl-!|.atd hfrt .. - dG Cr'.rt.{I Coloredo .ft e7d- t.tl Junc
by CAT-FERInE X.
r ganarel prrhcrrhlp
Crthcrtnc X. Tobron
Gcnarrl Prrtnar
Eeglc
'I
I
I,
DOlSotI lROff,ERS, ; 3arcrrl prstnrrthlPrr.r.-rr 6/'S/?athrtHdJtl.ild.
t- brrir. tsr trt ra-.
latt ll La tllrrt lttt rti' rbi!- t-'ia i-rYq rtr l b &.l..d.ool'l'.-.iirtr.-r-6
EAGLE COUNTY
State of Colorado
CERTIFICATION
I, Johnnette Ptrillips, Clerk and Recorder of the
of Eagle, State of Colorado, do hereby certify
County
that the
attached is a full, true, and complete copy of
WARRANTY DEED
recordgd on .rurw zz, leeo as appears
upon the records of my office.
Book No 532 Page No.s68
Reception 428725
I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the
Counfy of Eagle, State of Colorado, this 3org day Of
, A.D. 19 e2 .
JOHNNETTE PIIILLPS
CXerk and Recorder
,l'$SeFE',1'9!il&J*LEierE,iSE'31'rgfrl'?.{of?"g:i"f;B6"fi"r5.i3rJJlofl".w e1:';:r
,'!;lis!EDcc-9-f - r?9. p0 f.' i_!i'e!se_S_ ?9 : t ; l qA' _t! ! ;iltincc -qi- l s. oE tecr r..
'ii.E? rT{ltr*}'f*t'' Pri.,?'"?r. "- iPi,.9:.9fi,:*ll'.i.ls ,:,3,1?., i.:reE-Flls;g.[.,i"-',* .;;,.;-;:i
: .. .---:-------- '-i=!}
.r: I tt- firil hr.l, fdr in.l rr er|.irl.r !.ti.rr.ar .'iiirnel,:l
'!h-;r,.'. rhr -:r,,1}nr. r"rhrf,..r t!.r,.t,f i,,..t...t,\ i::' .r.i: \Xlrlr,lit:tt:tat,t.r.'.\t,: t.\ $ !Tr\-.n!.S lt tlL.if,alf 'r.,...tr.! in, | .,r .
rn.lr-:ri' :tr?,tr\ .rFlrrt.rrr., i.t-.t, q.hn,,..
s:rnrl- S..i l,(l .r .i lL,i.a:..l :n . !,.. 1..... , .rl nr
:'r'rll
.-t. r! |
tl: - sT-lTl- lr!'(ittl ot:l;hr, I
.?j''liF(.r|r:nins.in|:.|t}rr.(;.rionr||'|n.tr!.!'h..rIn.&tn|..'xn.:'.hr...|',|'...'ir.i|.,.lt||..'...'.''.:.rh.eilrr..rrgtr!.:rtir.rntrFjt,.l||rn:rn.l ,r.rna{.r.:i.....i,.!.1.r-....!t{,,r ). . r r t r : , , . ! : .. r r . rt,,r,r.itr,,. 1".':i6,..-ralt.-Cinrn.lt-rh.,lllns.h!.,,rir|!4t,rrtni.{...r..||t.1.,r...,Jr. {r,frr- rr.t..rr,.:.:rr,rrxr-:,;.r.'.iq&
,:]*:F,
' .::':-:-1..
: :url!. l lF.rrlrt'l InrlrItt$, rr:t! tr'!t. r-r \: r.!.-..r!rl'n!,7 ,.ri.:,--tt.rrt.trr, '. :...r1j,
':hi:A '.: f rroin.crkuloF. nrt rrlu..r-i::, r r,, ,..\..n,,h: rrr?:r.,.Jrrj:.,.....i..rr-.,. n,,,tn..!, ., .-. r,1-th'.'jix'Inr|ti.lth..l.cf|lF,l.]F'||'.',.!i.'!,|tr..l.t'l-.,.rl..'.t|{.ni|l..lj..|.11.;'9..1".,1:..'-.;l
i: :hi:s '.: f
; . 1h.." pr..-n!". ''..-.) it!-
-,;.!'t.:u.n,..rt;.nlicrrr.t|h(H{nh.|r.|ht|||t.ra|ltnrr'rr...,r.l.|'|l.n|i.,.tll||:ln'i!.i'|.!'.!.-r|.,|...t'f
j,: t'/'*?i'::lj:::::-'::-:'*i::';''r:T:'.'::.'t",i:'t"::'":'l'-"1:l:"':':t:':'.''j':'t !:'iIr'i,"!.,urr 1;,.lfi'f6,i,,:I::. ea.s?ft9nls, .restrictjons, and Lhe ac "ilorern taxes ior the ycar t.tlj
'i 1982, wh j:h Grantee here5y assurnes anJ a.r, . i to pai'. . i:'i.i
i
.i hnrsn,n.,l liiiin ir-";n rhr,t,rrr nr..! r.. r r'r.ir:.,r.,i ti,r.r.,r !,..,rr ....t-- ,..n,J nrrt. rtr ' l-
' i:.'i.nr"r': E rClC
SS rr:. i:j.,:., -,- ' .ti',.'-r.l
t ,:.i trrrr\?t a*t , rr ! . ni F.ri rt I ,\ .
i . ar.'..j trh.,r.
--- -' EEsr
'..'.<iil Fa3' coFr-' " ..,: ,'.':':AVAILAB
'-t
er .,..ri r.L-tiirif
-i.nr+r.: ErCl
EAGLE COUNTY
State of Colorado
CERTIFICATION
I, Johnnette Phillips, Clerk and Recorder of the Counfy
of Eagle, State of Colorado, do hereby certify that the
attached is a full, true, and complete copy of
rgcordgd On_ MARcE 3r , LsBz as appears
upon the records of my office.
Book No.338 Page No.4i5
Reception zJ4 I OO
I have hereunto set mv hand and affixed ,Ll al a a. '.rne Dear oI Ine
Counfy of Eagle, State of Colorado, this 3orn day Of
A.D. 19 e' .
JOIINNETTE PHILLPS
Clerk and
l;:iI Vi I l.rqc , Fi rs E Fi llng,
'@
hEf.trcl<
1l ti) t,n n;l:r(rl.e p.rrticul.-rrly dcscrlbcd
inE,I?75 by nnd::e!, f,. ltorrls ce-ProsiclcnL and Frcr.lc ri.c ktrry of Val1 Assocl
hand and off icial se
ion
., a Col ora(lo Corporation.
ll,.-t '"
1
? lil)r|t|'.!
lr Slrr ,
,'n:f.':1:-l: ;,::-' io:
L.'r 'l .r;:.i i. ' ': i\
z. icr; .'' l-,rt ii.
r,r.ri'. ?,,.i :.-,t(, i i :'
:,,1 r.itj 'ec 1i-r-il\ '
i:$.,, --l I i!'1...,. ;
".:
:-'. -. .. .:. rrt)ri.. ..:
rj,i;'
."i ,, l" :l). "' 'l
::
' 'l .' "
.ili'i i"\ -
:rl l,.i'{
ixi.
ttts l-.rs ||t!- l' rn.l !ii .'taF:rl '{l
. 1t :l
.1Krt i il' - '
BGST
COPY
AVAILABLE
?8dtrju
^ri1.r .J rA, 713-
,'l';t: : i ;'','':l',i! [?,1
1'r l1 4 tr Pl{'ll'l
.:l
jtii'ihiii i.s ts:c.ilri T'...i*' ,'i'.' -':r! "rr'':i:'lc :^::'.''i'=i:;T,.,..,.,**:Yl
'i "" ' '. rr t'r i' I hr 'rt rtl
-' : Ll5 'f th'l'r'l l'brt'f"r
e: " ;t John A. Dobsoti'
?,/./ "::..-:.,-...._ r,.,
";.i:::'
:'Jr*;ru' r-i.";rt | ;i ;'*'^1''
I i l:.rLl
t orh .irs {. Au8us t
i.,rr8l+. r,r J .nn A- Dobson and Cachertne
i t, tt* .*-",o.-t ,.r".. ;-- 7'5 7
Mal ,irs {r ne6ee r
ii. Dobson, )l'anaL Fn**-Y !..'-:fr;;" k;;;,-, q ?a.t-L ^L& :
P[l31'ffi[ii"."'
v.tl
Colorrdo
t.lr (310.00)
Counttof Ertl c
. for thr conrldrrrllon ol
Dollrrr' In hrnd Prld'
hrrrbl d(rl rnd qult drln(r) to
ffi11$:flY,'Jll'0o..
y.ll i' Counttof Ertlc
tto!.rtt tr th'
!.. rtGreh.d 'Ehlbl3 A'
Counlt ot
:3",.1R:"E-;ii'i;;:",'::li'fil"I?'il..,'
corarrircg DEED, roR TrtLE ?ltt?osEs
rlro brg*n .r rtrrrt rnd nunbrr
dth rtr lb rPgntt'nrncr
J
$rnrd rhtr ?7 ? drr ol
sr^rsoP@r.oB^Do' , l.*Counttof u:glc
X.,ltC l0rrcr.rlr ottD-tr"r t-'
l.nr.t.f.
. rnd Strtr ot
Dr lve
'
rnd St|tt of
ErSlc
r,,; I rJi C
COLO"ri.!Ll
Col onilo , thr follorln3 rrd
, rnd Strtr of Golorrdo' to rtl:
FEC
la. oo
g)Htt
ot{Ll.
Junr .19 90
m!so:( BRotlEns
. 3.ncul D.rtrr'tthlP
Crthcrlnr tl. Dotron
Gancrrl Ptrtnlr
;;;;;-rt' "!.."r.'-iD''.
i("""'ott'"r''. r!'tr
TAX NOTICE
Flatan For Yout Fiecorca
3,033,39
1 ,206.65
8,545.30
1 ,841 .83
6.94
407.55
| 18.94
355.93
4s2.72
212.53
396.9S
FULL IAX
16,528.77
lst Hari i::( IUE FEg 2g
2^a dait :zr DlE JUNE 15
Jr.:S :he iCilol'/ir':g
sFE,liAi- As3=-!S NIE i\iT
ASSESSOR S LATE FiLiNiG FE:
8.28r.38
8;264.3,0
Pfr(xid6
GASTII0F GRAI'SI|AIIER. MC. .
lqsExqusl_E. I:_:..${InER, P. S.
231 EAST GORE CREEK
vAlL, c0 81657
Please see reverse side of this form for additional information.
t,)04nrb{M
qrlrtd"'lt'V
tulake Checks P.::.,.::re r'o: EAGLE COUf.lTy TFi:.
TAX NOTICE
RETAIN TOP PORTION FOR YOUR RECOF'S
:'.' TF-a.iSUiEi - tsOX {79. En6L:
STATE PARCEL t . 210r -082-10-004
B00t( - 0532 PAGE - 0568
VAIL VILLAGE FIL I
BLMK 5.8 tOT A PT OF
T"hii$ :,s Tf{ r *N
T{AT V#U WLL
SB t1o.25..,,n abscnc€ ot State LEgislabve Funding.
-
,)l ,OO
),our Sd|ool Gen6.a Fund Levy lrvould ha\.! been - .v'rs(,
10.048
3.997
28.306
6. t0l
0.023
r.350
0.394
t.t79
1.334
0.704
1.3t5
gvol.#q1-Lqh"'1*u,1
tn-ollu &'k 1870
fr
N6l
Ar ur.d hanin. th. rinFdlt includ'i tho plutll rnd tha merullnc iudcr thc lomlnlnr rnd
mutatFn.lctt rl tha GDntc.xt mry rtilu-ilc'
-
^nrrr.urrd \?.Tt:r ''.ib93. . Lart.'rrrf 2ll hA (E'\E;il;ifJ.l[ .tor-o ffi
!lone
o' It*'{-&{f fiHEIS'E[tbi SH.m.Joln l. DDdr' a/r
i;tf tlie lr'r ... ='-- iilFf,ffi?te€gtf'Doccmad
STATE OF eor,on^Do -. I -
_couNrroF ajL:t{i*
:9 7'( rnvol
|.l!l.lonll |("F!"ri?lr!.r.r-j.! Dr .rre &'rn]' -' -fiFEEgr-
(rn unti:rricd yrcnonf '. Dr'rnr
lYitnr.rs n!'hond nndotftinl r.nl.
r'1\' t( lt -dL.rF-;.rtrirr'' lr.'rl il"' 't+' r''
'EE{:Eir I'
ln undlvidrd ttro-rlcvcniht (2,/It) lntcrcr! ln a.part 9f F! iill,Dlc:k 5-8, V!lJ' Villsg. Flrtt Flli:rg, !or. Prrtlcqltrr:r qrlcElD'a
rr lollot t:
Gorarnclnq rt th. Northu.st coEn.! ol rrld Lot rri th'nc'
i-66-ia;06' E rnd. rtong th. t{6rth ltn. o( ratd lpt ra: .-dl'trnc'
il-rro.fg tccc to thr fotnt of bcqinnlnt, tbcncc x 66- 18r00r E
ina etons thr North lt-nr o! rel'd tot tri lo8.oo f"t' ur'nc'
;';?-ii;6c;-i e atitin.. of ?3.03; thlnca s 26'{l'oo' t{ r
dbeancr o! 75 !e.t, thcnc. !r 6lrlgioo' tl r dlrtenct og 2Z'0o
i.iii tft.ni. s 25'{1'oor' l{ ! dltta!':c. of ?t.35 !"tt th'nc' s
oo'oi'oo' E r dlrtanca o! 9,98 f.!:; th.nc. s 79'l?'00' tr I
dlrtener o! t?.ll ft.t, lhGncr N tor4lroo. tr r dlttrncr o? 120'00
;::i;"il.;;.-i-i-{t;o;" tr a dt3ts::c! o! 45.05 !r't to th' Polnt
o! brglnnlngt contrlnlng .239 ac:.t !or. or 1r'3'
roq.th.! trlth r Darlt.tuaI non-rxcluclvr .atcE'n' for vrhiculrr
rn6 prdcstrtan lirErirs and cgr.33 lPFurt.nant to ch' abov'-
d..cilb.d propcrty, dcccrlbed !3 lollot'rt:
l trrct o! land ln trct a, Btock 5-!, vlll vlllrg' l3t rlllnE,
ErEIa Countyp Coloredo. b.lnE ?.3 l.at o:t .llh'r t1d' ol r c'nE'r
1ln. drrcrlbad at tolloss:
lrglnnlnE rt th. southratt cornlr of tlld lrl r, alock 5-1,
tlrincr zi.lt tcrt llong ch. arc o! r curv. to th. l.!c' rrld
cqnru havlns a rrdlus 6f ezl.u r !..!, I c.ntlrl lnEl. ot
?'og,ao" eni a chord that b.arr }l 16'16112' E ! dlttrnc. ol 77.79
!..c to thr t!u. polnt of b.glnnlnE rlro b.lnE r Po$!.?l-tl'tlorth rtght-o!-vay o! Gorl cr.rk Drlvrt thcncr X 10'{1r00' ll !
dtrlrnc.-of 50.OO-f!.tt thoncr !f ,l?'02'5Oi E r dirtrnc. o( 78.28
!..c to ! F6lnt on thc south boundlry o! th. !bov. dl;crtbrd
trlct.
tts
a3?t?€ 8-54r p-e3l tol3o/go 14114 FG e oF :
I o
ie herelnafter. referred to as the Real Property.
and
all
T:-;-r:i:-. ' - . . . -.. :. '.' ..,r ..-. ''. :,:l(:'"Vr.'' .. '
-shrubs, grass; and improved wa|$ays; and through.or Snder which may' be
, t '.,'
.constructed, and maintained improvements' necessary,'desirable or con-.'.:
.rrenie$t for the proqision and rnaintgnance of utility services to
' ' 1'' -
' 1'.:
ladjacent or other niarby Lands. proiidled ttrat saiil utility improvements
''r '. ' : ' il "'i': .:. "
:nt disruPtion,or altefation to the surface of
.-.'.i ,
o!. leeppnsibllltY
O orot.ArroN
MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:
', VAIL A$SOCIATES, It{C., a Colorado corpolacion (t'Vail")
is'the owner of that certain property described in Exhibit rrdl
I
attached to and.by this reference made a part hereof. Sueh\ lroperty
.'
"Va11, a Colorado municlp.aL corporation (t'?own"), its successors and
asslgns, for public use as hereinafter described, TO HAVE AND TO
HOLD the Earne, together !^rith all and singular the aPPurtenanceg
privileges thereunto belonging or in anywise ePPertal-nlng, and
the estate, right, tltle and inderest luhaEsoever' of Vail , lts
successors end assigns; PROVIDED ALI^IATS, that thts dedlcatLon is
expressly made and accepted subJect to the following express condl-
tLons, provisions, restrictions, and covenants rolrigh shall aPPl)r
toandbindtheToo*,itssuccegsogg.anpassigns ;..:,.1. No:use of the SubJec! Land shal! conflict with or'
vLolate any provision Ln the Protectlve.Covenants'Of,ivall .Village.:
Flret Flling, Eagle'Coungy, Colotado as recorded,Ln'book 174 at
: .... . , , ..:..
gage.L79 of the records of the,CLerf and Recorder bf Eagle County,
CoLorado and the amendment thereto es,recorded in book 178 at page
' 'l 'l'l:'"'r' 1
345 of the records of the Clerk,land,.Recorder of EagLe County,:
Golorado ,,i ,,.. .".
2. The Real Property shall. be usedr held and rnaintained
!
.in good order.ancl condlition.by the Toyn, subject to easementb or rights-
. !tof-way of, record.,or apparent (inghided without linitation an easement
contained in instrument dated ' Lg7-l and recorded on
- lq? , in Book at"Page of the records of
--
.Eagl-e.,Cowty, Coforado) for"u.se lonly' as an oPen area for the'general, : .. : . '
canPing.or overnight stays by any person or persons. Nor ehall there
be.pe.rnitted,wtthin or upon rhe Real property: any informet or
organLzed pubLic or prlvate gatherLng or any other act by any person
or persons, which in the judgrnent of vall- or Ehe Town, may deface,
alter, destroy.or danage the l-andscaplng, vegetation or aes$etic
value of the Real Property or litter'iEs surface
. 4. Except for trees, shrubsr FrErss, J.mproved, walkways.
fountains and other decorative items consistent with the use of the
Rqal Property as a public park, no structures, either temporary or
perrnanent, no! any other inprovements shall be construsted or pernitted
to remain on the Real property. rf at any tine the surface of the Real
Property shall be'disturbed, vair reserves the rLght, but shall not be
un.det any obligatJ.on, to take any, action necesaary to reEtore such land
to itE original condition. l
5. In the event.of a failure by the Town, its successors
and asslgns to conply with each, Fnd elery one of the condltlons
'h'ereof, after having received wrLtten notfce: of such fairure and
after receipt of
auccessots or asgign8, to r"-"oa"i.and reposses8. the,Real PropertyItur:(;esseEtt. or asslglr8,. EO fe-enEe{:.and Tep
or any part or porElon thereof,,and Eherealeof ,,,ap,f. Etrereafter hold .and enJoy it asor any part or portlon thereof, apf.Elereafter hold.and enJoy !, .,:it, a:r. :if these presents had not been nad.F,i;;,n:;'.., iiitl4i-i':: ,i
IN I,IITNESS WHEREoF, thiqi'rlqp,1'i".i'":i:hie;l:;Lnstrument has been executed' ';i'. ' j,,: i, ' .
thls
ATTEST:
(sEAr)
.n
Fredffiffi
I
ss.
and Frederick
Colorado
hand and
S. Otto as
corporation, on behalf
official seal.
of such corporation.
instrr.ment was acknowledged beifore
, 1975, by
this
ag
i ' Secretary of 'Vail
ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION
-
Acceptance of Dedication was
: . i; .; .r'.
Clerk of the'Town of VaiL, Stale of Colorado.
Notaly Public
''
1
, Mayor of the Town of
municlpal corporation, and on'behalf of the Town
to the authority v-ested in.me by Ordinance No.
the Board of Trustees'of the Town of Vail, Colorado,
,i
t,..'
acknowledged
'.:
ffiTNESS rny hand and offlcial seseal .
. EXTIIBIT A TO
1DAY OF
A DEDICATION DATED, L97s, FROM
CORPOrtATIONvArl.-Assoererss,
TO THE ToWN OF VATL"::C.OIORADO,
A MUNTCTPAL :COnS.oXATroN .
't
4 part of Tract ttArr, Block.5-8, 'VaiI Village FLrst FilLng,
County- of Eagle,_State of Colorado, more pirticularly
deecribed as follows:
Coumencing at the l{orthwest;cotn€f, of eaid Tract :t'A'l
. thence North 66o18r00" East,and along the.l{orth.line ofsai'dTract''Al-.-lll.4lfeet,.tothe.p5intorteeiili"g,_
thence South.85"l-5'52" East a distairce of L26.64 feeEithence North 79o17 '00" East a distance.of.63.4I feet;' :
thence South L0'43'00" EasE a distance oi Z.S feei:. itrencel{orth 79"L7 !00" East a distance:of '.41.0 feet; thence South: . ).
.: L0"43'00" EasL a disEance.of':22.O..feeti. thencg North,791l,7.!"00",.. ,.',,..
:distance of L2.71 feet; thence'tr1or66.19:eff'!QS.I:gggt:a--dts-, t.i. '.';,..
.. .tence of,.4i0'feet; thence South',10:43t-00'r East :a distance ' '. '.
63.34 feet aLong the arc of a curve"to the right said curvehaving a radius of 622.79 feet,.a central anEle.of 5o4g'39" .,. and whose, chord bears.Northj,,84654'.08" East aidietancej'of , 'r. , " .. 63.3?.,feet; rhence Uoith 0o09i00'1 WesL a.distance of 89 .21 .'" , feet; thence South 79'17'00:.:r,ygsg:;a'distance. ol:.,tz.40. feet;''
' :thencb North 63"35 r00" West :a ;distanc e of : 44';79 'feet; 'thence . :
North L0'43'00" West a distance of'82.38 feet; thence South
66o18129" West a distance of.23l.65 feet to the point of. beginning, containing 0.424.acres, more or less.-
ii .
REAL PROPERTY
LEGAI DESCRIPTION
J.
€(ll
o,,
'E S*9'tr ra)E€gJt,6
b*€EF E
? EN*F:
FSg
Sonnenalp Properties, inc.
20 VailRoad
Vail, Colorado 81657
231 East Gore Creek
Vail. Colorado 81657
Sitzmark Inc.
183 East Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 81657
Hillis of Snowmass Inc.
170 E. Gore Creek Drive
Vail, Colorado 81657
Vail Associates Inc.
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Colorado 8165g
,l,r=u MAY AFFEcr ror" ,"orrJ
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 ol the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on March 24, 1997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a major exterior alteration in CC'|, at the A & D Building, located at 286 Bridge
streeylots A, B, & C, Block 5A, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: 286 Bridge Street, Inc., represented by Craig SnowdonPlanner: Dominic Mauriello
A request for a major exterior alteration in CC1, at the Creekside Building, located at 229 Gore
Creek Drive/Lot A, Block 58, Vail Village 'lst Filing.
Applicant: Michael Ditch, represented by Dave CarsonPlanner: Lauren Waterlon
A request for a minor SDD amendment to Special Development District No. 30 at the Vail Athletic
Club, located at 352 E. Meadow Drive/Parcels A & B, VailVillage 1st Filing.
Applicant: VWT 1987 Limited Partnership, represented by John PerkinsPlanner: George Ruther
A request for a residential addition, utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 778 Potato Patch
Drive/Lot 18, Block 1, Vail Potato Patch.
Applicant: Fred Bartlit, represented by Bill AndersonPlanner: Tammie Williamson
A reouest for a maior exlerior alteration and minor subdivision at Gasthof Gramshammer, located
-^&t 231 E. Gore Cre-ek Dr./Part of Lot A, Block 58, Vail Village 1st Filing.
D{pplicant: Pepi Gramshammer, represenled by Pierce, Segerberg, & AssociatesPlanner: George Ruther
A request for a worksession to discuss a conditional use permit to allow Type lll EHUs for
seasonal housing, located at 1309 Vail Valley Dtive/legally described as:
beginning at the Northwest corner ol Seclion 9, Township 5 South, Hange 80 west of the Sixth
Principal Meridian thence S 89'31?9" E 2333.84 fee't, along the North line of said Section 9, lo a
point on the norlherly right-otway lence line of Interstate Highway No. 70 thence along the
northerly righl-of-way fence line of Interstate Highway No. 70 as follows:
S 67"41 '33" W 41 5.82 feet; thence 578"13'02" W 1 534.29 feet, to a point ol curvature;
thence 456.43 feet on a curve to the right with a radius of 5580.00 iset, the chord of which
bears 580"33'38" W 456.30 feel to a point on the Westedy line ol said Section 9:
thence departing the northerly rightof-way fence line of Interslale Highway No. 7O and following
the Westerly line of said Section 9 N00'i8'21"E 565.1 1 feet to the point of beginning.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Andy Knudtsen and Susie HervertPlanner: Dominic Mauriello
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular otf ice holrs in the
projeci'planner's office located at the Towri of Vail Communily Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road.
Sign language interprelation available upon request whh 24 hour notification. Please call479-2114 voice or 479-2356
TDD for information.
Community Development Department
Published March 7, 1997 in the Vail Trail.
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PBOPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE ls HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmenta-l ,commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a pubLic hearing in accordance viith Seclion 18'66'060 of the Municipal Code ot the
TownofVaitonnugrsill,isgi,at2:00P.M.inlheTownof VailMunicipalBuilding' ln
consideration of:
A request for a variance from Section 18.13.060 (setbacks),.to.a.llow for a new residence to
encroach into the troni ietOacX, located at 226 Fdrest Roadi Lot | 1 , Block 7' Vail Village 1st
Filing.
Applicant: John Krediet
Planner: Lauren Waterton
A request tor 250 square feet of Addirional GRFA, to allow for the interior conversion of an
existirrg crawt spacc into a home otfice, localed ai sgg Rocxtedge/Lot 1' Block 1,Vail Village 3rd
Filing.
Applicant: Bill and Eleanor Stolzer
Planner: Tammie Williamson
A request lor a variance f rom Section 18.24.130, to allow f or 5 dwellino units and a varlance
trom Secriorr 18.69.040, to ailow tor a portron oiif'" Oriroing to be canillevergd 9,v-9r parl.of.the
. ;d6-y;. flo;O prui^, io"iino ir zgr EasiGore Creek Drive/Liit n, Block 5-8, Vail Village First
:.- l F lllnq.*-
l! Applicarrt: Pclli(iram:;hatnmerI Planner: George Ruthor
A requesl lor 250 square feet of Additional GRFA, to allow lor a garaoe addition with an
exoanded bledroom,'bath and deck, tocateO if ZSSO gafO Hnountiin R"oad/ Lot 34, Block 2, Vail
Village 13th Filing.
Applicant: Ron and Marilyn Wollard represented by Steve Riden
Planner: Dirk Mason
A request tor 250 squarc leet of Additional GRFA, to allow Jor a bedroom and bathroom
aOOition, located at i g+aR Sunburst Drive/Lot 21 A, Vail Valley Filing No. 3.
Applicant: Alvin and Mary Ann Rapp, represented by Mark Donaldson and Associates
Planner: Dirk Mason
The applicarions and information about the proposals are, availaqle- tor puP]ig,illpjgi?:.gutins
regularolfice hours in the proiect planner's office located at the Town ot Vall uommunlly
Development Department' 75 South Frontage Road'
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479'2114 voice or 479-2356
TDD for information
Cornmunitv Developrnenl Department
Published July 25. 1997 in the Vail Trail.
M"Lun' f-rilL'-.J. j- -l I\ --\J4'r /!-.1'l
TO:[N OF IAILI/
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and EnvironmentalCommission ol the Town ol
Vait will hold a public h";titd in i""otOance uiitn Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on augusi ts,"r997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town ol Vail Municipal Building' In
consideration ol:
A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for wireless communication antennas with
accessory equipment,loJat"d dl $iriVaitCondominiums, 501 N. Frontage Road/ Blk 2'Tracl
C. Vail Potato Patch 2nd Filing'
Aoolicant: Johannes Faessler
Pidnner: Dominic Mauriello
A request for a condilional use^permit, 19.allgw for the installation of a-ne-w rgo,f;t.qp air handler,
tocated at Vait Vatley fvf eOiCaf ienter,'1 81 West Meadow Drive/ Lots E&F, Vail Village 2nd
Filing.
Applicant: Vail Clinic' Inc
Pianner: George Ruther
A request lor a minor subdivision, to allow for the subdividing.of two. elisting-lots into three lots'
iocatiO at t 52l Buftehr Creek Road/Lots 3 & 4, The Valley Phase V/ SDD #34.
Applicant: James Flaum, represented by RKD
Pidnner: Dominic Mauriello
A request f or a conclitional use permit, to allow for a recreational facility- (skate parf)' on the top
level of the Lionshead Parking blructure , located at 395 E. Lionshead Circle/ Vail Lionshead
First Filing.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Lauren Waterton
A reouest for bedroom and sunroom additions, utilizing the 250 Ordinance, located at 2945
Booth Creek Drive/ Lot 3, Block 2 Vail Village 1 1th Filing'
Applicant: Jorgen Hintz, represented by Craig Snowden
Planner: Lauren Waterton
A request for a minor subdivision, a major exlerior alteration' a common area variance lrom
lSertion 18.04.130 "niJO"niitV
iratiinbe fiom Section 18.24.130, allowing.for 5 dwelling units'
-Jit"aaLZ31 East Gore Cree( DriveiLot A, Block 5-8, Vail Village First Filing.
tApplicant: PePi GramshammerPidnner: George Ruther
The applications and intormation about the proposals are.available for public.inspectiorr-during
reqular oflice hours in ine prolect pl"nner's'otfice located at the Town ol Vail Community
Ddvelopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road'
sign language interpretation available upon requesl wilh 24 hour notification.
TDD for information.
Communitv Development Department
Published hugust B, 1997 in the Vail Trail.
I
'Segerberg &Spaeh Architects P.C A.I. A.
FebruarY 28 | L994
Gasthof Gramshammer Addition
Part of Lot A, Btock 5-8, Vail ViIIage
First Filing, Eagle County, Colorado
Legal Description
L) Part of Lot A, and E-I, Block 5-B
owner and Address
Gasthof Inc.
231 E. Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 8L657
c.H. Rosenquist and
P.s. Switzer
231 E. Gore Creek
Vail, colorado aL657
Sitzmark Inc.
L83 E. Gore Creek
VaiI, Colorado 81657
Town of VaiI
75 South Frontage Road W
Vail, Colorado 81657
Hillis of Snowmass Inc.
170 East Gore Creek Drive
Vail, Colorado aL657
Vail Associates Inc.
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Colorado BL65B
Village Center Assoc.
l-25 w. willow Bridge Road
Vail, Colorado A1657
sonnetlp Properties, Inc.
20 Vail Road
Vail, Colorado aL657
Town of VaiI
75 South Frontage Road W
Vail, Colorado 8L657
*2) Part of Lot A, Block 5-B
*3) Part of Lot A'Block 5-B
4) 'Lot B, Block 5-B
*5) Lot c & D, Block 5-B
*6) Part of Lot K,Block 5-E
*7) Part of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
*8) Part of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
9) Tract f,Block 5-E
'tindicates stamped envelopes enclosed
' Main Office: 1000 Sourh Frontage Road West . Vail, Colorado 81657 ' 3031476-4433
One Tabor Center . 1200 Seventeenth Street, Suite 515 . Denver, Colorado 5A202 ' 3O31623-3355
rHIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPEFTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning an-d Environmental Commis.sion of the Town of
Vait wiil hotd a pubtic nearing iffid;;tffi;" uiitn Seiiionl8.66.060 of the tvlunicipal.Code of the
ro*n ot Vaif on Juty 14,
'i
SdZ, ai t,OO P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building' In
consideration of :
A request for a variance from Seclion 18.28.070 (Setbacks) and a conditional use permit for an
outdoor dining decK, to allow for a deck expansion at crossroads, located at 143 East Meadow
Drive/Lot P. Block 5D, Vail Village 1st Filing'
Mountain Top lce Cream (Haagen Daz), represented by Bill Pierce
Dominic Mauriello
A request f or a conditional use permit to allow lor a Type ll EHU' located at 1 86 Forest Rd'/Lot
9, Block 7, VailVillage 1st Filing.
Applicant: Mike Flannery, represented by Russell Platt
Planner: Dirk Mason
A reouest for an amendment to a previously approved minor subdivision, located at 2339
Chamonix Lane/Tract A, Vail Heights Filing #1.
Applicant: Robert Hunter' represented by Greg Amsden
Planncr:Gcorgc Ruthcr
Applicant:
Planner:
A request for a wall height variance of approximately two feet, located at 4093 E' Spruce
Wayllots 4, 5, & 6, Block 9, Bighorn #3.
Applicant: Vail East Lodging Association, represented by Lany Summerlin
Planner: Dirk Mason
A request for a minor amendment to the SDD #2, to allow for residential additions to Units D8'
og ahO D12 (Northwoods),located at 600 VailValley Drive'
Applicant: Richard & Gail Barrett, Bert Nordin, and Jorge & Eugenia Riedel, represented by
RaY StorYPlanner: Lauren Waterton
A request for a major exterior alteration in CC1 and a minor subdivision, to allow for the..
s;i$,HiFu6ttlul"*tr**:i""gut'"1'l'1,?t'&1"'il33rllJlp"?i$ffiyff
F'[:l'33,
Applicant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Pierce, Segerberg' & Associates
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a final review of a zoning code amendment, to allow for outdoor commercial ski
iioiigJ, "" i conoiiionir use and to aitow for iommerciaiski storage (indoors) in all building
levels-. located in the CCI and CCll Zone Districts'
Applicant: Vail Associates, Inc., represented by Joe Macy
Planner: Lauren Waterton ,-#w
A request |or a conditiona| use permit and a variance from Section 18.22.1'4olo1^111" F^"sg,^*
parkino). to attow for the operalion of a reat esrate"oitici inine Swiss Chalet' located at 62 East
Meado-w Drive/Lot K, Block 5E' Vail Village I st Frlrng'
Aoolicant: Johannes Faessler
Pidnner: Dominic Mauriello
A rcqucst for a conditional usc permit and.a variancc to allow for an unpavcd parking arca' to
allow for trail hcad p*ki;g. i;ilJ "i n"a San4stonc Road/Parccl A, Lions Ridgc Filing #l '
Applicant: lOth Mountain Hut Association, rcprescntcd by Pcter Lodram
Planncr: Russ Forrcst
The applicalions and informatron about lhs proposals are available for public inspection durino reoular otlice hours in
rhe proiect ptann€r,s onice rociaiJ'iiiriJi;*fi o1 v"ir corr,friii'o"'lJop."ni o"p"tttent] 7S-south Frontags
Ro ad.
Sign fanguage interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notitication' Please call 479-2114 voice or 479-2356
TDD lor information.
Communilv Dsvelopmenl Deparlment
Published iune 27 , 1997 in the Vail Trail.
Sonnenalp Properties, Inc.
20 Vail Road
Vail, CO 81657
C.H. Rosenquist and P.S. Switzer
23 I East Gore Creek
Vail. CO 81657
Vail Associates, Inc.
PO Box 7
Vail, CO 81657
Hillis of Snowmass, Inc.
170 East Gore Creek Drive
Vail. CO 81657
ll,,l,,,,ll,ll,,,l,ltl"tl,'lltl
Sitzmark, lnc.
183 East Gore Creek
Vail, CO 81657
Village Center Association
125 West Willow Bridge Road
Vail, CO 81657
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail oir April 28, 1997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a major amendment to SDD #5 (Vail Run), to eliminate the.requirement tor three
coveied tennis coJrts, tocated at 1000 Lions Ridge Loop/Lions Ridge Filing #'1.
Applicant: ; Vail Run Condominium Association, represented by Larry Eskwith
Planner: Dominic Mauriello
A request for a worksession to discuss a major exterior alteration in CCI and a minor
subdivision, to allow lor the construction of a parking garage, 9 accommodation units, 1
condominium and new retail oflice space at the Gasttriof Giamshammer, located at 231 E. Gore
\4Creek Dr./Part of Lot A, Block 58, Vail Village 1st Filing.
flppl6ant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Pierce, Segerberg' & Associatest Pianner: George Ruther
A request for a minor subdivision, to allow for the modification to the existing platted building
envelope, located at 1082 Riva Glen/Lot 3 Spraddle Creek Estates.
Applicant: Lee Kirch, represented by Gordon PiercePlanner: Lauren Waterton
A request for a major amendment to SDD #4 (Cascade Village), to allow for a skier bridge and
modiiications to aliowable GRFA and building height limitations, located at 1150 Westhaven
Lane/Lots 39-1& 39-2, Glen Lyon Subdivision.
Applicant: Timothy Pennington, represented by Sherry DorwoodPlanner: Dominic Mauriello
A request for a residential addition utilizing the 250 Ordinance, to allow for the construction of a
dorm'er addition, located at 2943 Bellflower Drive/Lot 4, Block 6, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Frank Bannister, represented by RKD
Planner: Tammie Williamson
A request to remove a condition of approval, from an approved.setback variance, requiring..that
the e'xterior walls and roof remain duiing the remodel process, located at 226 Forest Road/Lot
1 1A, Block 7, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: John KredeitPlanner: Lauren Waterton
nI
*rY'
. nrto,' ^ lq'|jlt('"rt{
A request for a final review for a conditional use permit to allow Type lll EHUs for seasonal
housing, localed at 1309 Vail Valley Drive, Public Works Facility/legally described as:
beginning at the Northwest corner of Section 9, Township 5 South, Range 80 west ol the Si)dh
Principal Meridian thence S 89"31'49" E 2333.84 feet, albng the North line of said Seclion 9, to a
point on the northerly right-of-way fence line o[ Interslate Highway No. 70 lhence along the
northerly right-of-way fence line of Inlerstate Highway No. 70 as follows:
S 67"41'33" W 41 5.82 feel; thence 378'13'02" W 1534.29 foet, to a point of curvalure; thence
456.43 leet on a curve to the right with a radius of 5580.00 feet, the chord of which bears
S80'33'38'W 456.30 feel 10 a point on the Westerly line of said Section 9: lhence departing th€
northerly right-of-way fence lind of lnterslate Highwiy No. 70 and following the Westerly line of
said Seclion I N00'i8'21"E 565.1 1 feet lo lhe point ol beginning.
Applicant: Town of Vail, represented by Andy Knudtsen and Susie Hervert
Planner: ,, Dominic Mauriello
A request for a conditional use permit to allow for outdoor seating at the Red Lion Building
(Cledve/s Deli, The Chocolate Factory), located at 304 Bridge StreeVlots E, F, G, & H, Block
5-A, VailVillage 1st Filing,
Applicant: LandmarkCommercialDevelopmentPlanner: Tammie Williamson
The applications and informalion about the proposals are available for public inspection during re_gular office hours in
the prdect planner's office located at the Tbwn ot Vail Community Oevelopment Department, T5 Sottth Frontage
Road.
Sign f anguage interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2114 voic€ or 479-2356
TDD for information.
Communily Development Departmenl
Published April 1 1 , 1997 in the Vail Trail.
l: {' '\r
FEB-A'2 -37
anrUo tic Dccigl Rrvicw Board"
A. TY?EOFAPPLICATION:
El AdditionalGRFA(250)g BcdandBrcaldast
O C,;oditi@al UscParrit L
tr Majcc dMinorSubdivisiontl RczarinCg Sign Vzriauce
fi vrimrc
tr ZmiagCodeAmcndment
COMMTSSION APPR,OVA
ADrodmEDt to an Appoved Dwelopmtlt Ptan
EoploycoHosirrgUnit$ypc: )
Major or tr Minor CCI F-xsior Alration
(Vsrl Viilegs)
Majc or tr Minor CCII ExtqiorAltsaliqt
(Lionshad)
. tr SPecial Dcvclopmcat Disfiict
tr Major cn tr Murcr Anrcndrnqt o arr SDD
Expansion of hotel guest facilities
tr
tr
q,
tr
B.DNSCruMON OP THB RBQIJBST:
16: SS FRoM , Tov- CoM-DEv-DEPT. lD ' 9704?92432\o:Q*l
APPLIC^ATION FOR'PII\NNING ANJD T
MWNOF
GFJ.IFRAI . fNFORMATION
nis "ppIi"a;on
is fc ay poject rcquiriog appova by ttc Plurnirrg end Environmdl L.,.,,rrnisoE For spccific
iDftnmcioq rcc ttc subninal rcqrtncocrUs fu the partioulr apprwal tbat is rtqrrestcd- The application cal trot be
acepted ,rnrrl all rESnfoEd troruriton ii aubmitod ffc pn{cC rnay algo nctd to bc rvviFvcd by iho Tou'n Corrscil
PAGE I // 4
iB
rc ot lot aC. LOCATIONOFPROPOSAL: LOT - ELOCK sn FIUNG l/ail Village lst Filing
69ppg5g,23l E. Gore Creek Drlve BUUDINGIIAME:Gasthof Gramshammer
D.ZONTNG: Comrnercial Core I
- Pepi GramshanunerNAMEOFOWNER(S):' *H- :'**""**-:^
I4AILNGADDRESS,.2ll E. cor. cr""k
F. OWNER(S)STGNA
G. .NAMEOFREPRESENTA
1000 S. Frontaee Rd.r^J. #300}'IAILINGADDRESS:
Vail,, C0 81657 nroxB, 476-4433 _
K FEE - SEE IIIE ST.JBMIITAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TltE AppROpR |ATE FEE.
SIJBIIIIT TIIIS APPLICAfiON, ALL SITBIUITTAL NEQIJIREMENTS AND TEE BEE TO TEE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMT,MTY DEVEIOPMENT, ?5 SOIIM FB,ONTAGE ROAD,
Vail,-C0 81657 . 476-5626
Pierce, Segerberg & Associates
For (ffice Urc Onrv:
FccPaid:_CH:
Apptic*ion Dac,ltt""t" -'z+,'*t "? pEC Mcaing Daa;
R<Yir.d 5/96
February 21,1997
Town of Vail
Planning & Environmental Commission
72 South Frontage Road West
Vail, CO 81657
RE: Gasthof Gramshammer Addition
Part of Lot A, Block 5-B
Vail Village First Filing
Dear Sirs:
Pierce, SeterbeG & Associates
Architects, gC.,A.l.A.
Main Office
| 000 S. Frontage RoadW
Vail, CO 81657
fox: 970 476 4608
phone: 970 476 4433
Denver Office
l5l7 Wazee Street
Denver, CO 80202
fox: 303 623 7762
phone: 303 621 3355
We are proposing an addition to the existing Gasthof Gramshammer Hotel. This addition will
include 9 rooms, one condominium ofFrce and support facilities, a spa and fitness area for hotel
guests, and 15 spaces of enclosed parking. We propose to remodel a portion of the existing
hotel. This remodel will include removing an existing night club in the basement of the structure
and in tum enlarging the ski storage locker facility. A new exterior stairway will be designed to
replace the existing stair to this facility. This will improve pedestrian access to the lockers as
well as appearance, In addition, an employee lounge and locker area will be provided.
The intent of this proposed development application is to comply in all respects, with the CC1
zoning ordinance and Urban Design Guide Plan.
A. In accordance with CC1. 18.24:
GRFA restrictions for 10 units and common area have been mel The unit GRFA is 5,071 square
feet under what is allowed and the project total, including common area, is 1l square feet under
what is required. The design height of the project is well within what is allowed as 60% of the
structure is only two stories high. Site coverage is 6,622 square feet and 7,819 square feet is
allowed. Required parking for 9 lodge units, I condo, and an office, is 12. We are proposing 15
spaces witlt valet parking. No setbacks are required in CCI other than the 50' stream setback.
Our proposal has no effect on height, distribution ofpopulation, transportation, traffic facilities,
or public safety.
B. The impact of this proposal with respect to the Village Urban Design Guide Plan is as
follows:
1. Pedestrianization will only be enhanced by enclosing the existing unattractive
exposed parking and service yard.
1':\user\ksegerberg\docs\february 21 1997 letter to tov.doc
I Page2
Town of Vail
February 24, 1997
3. The streetscape framework will be improved by defining the perimeter of the
Children's Foundation Plaza and by, 4. finishing off a street enclosure which, at
this time, has no finite boundary. The existing parking/service lot is neither
attractive nor does it add a sense of space to the Plaza as the proposed
development will.
The Plaza edge will be paved in keeping with the existing paving design,
finalizing the design of the Plaza.
The building edge, as proposed, is low in profile at the Fountain Plaza and
continues the theme of the existing entry canopy. The main bulk of the structure
is to the north of the property along the creek where pedestrian scale is not as
critical.
6. Established view corridors will not be impacted. 1'he highest point of the building
is below the Gasthof structure and fits tightly behind the lodge. The proposed
addition cannot be seen from Bridse Street.
7. The impact of the proposed structure with respect to sun and shade is negligible.
It is wedged so tightly between Creekside and Gasthof that early moming sun and
late afternoon sun have no impact. At midday I summer, shade will be cast onto
the creek bank, and in winter at midday, longer shadows will be on the creek.
C. & D. Pepis/Gasthof Gramshammer has been a historical landmark in Vail since its beginning.
The buildings Tyrolean style has set the stage for Bridge Street and it is our intent to continue
this ambiance to the back of the structure, therefore, enhancing the Children's Fountain Plaza.
The pedestrian experience will be improved, the paving will be defmed, and landscape will
soften the old parking lot. The Streetscape Master Plan will be implemented through our
proposal. The architecture of the proposed development will be in keeping with the character of
the neighborhood as it will match the detail of the existing Gasthof Gramshammer.
Should you require further information to address these issues, please contact our office as soon
as possible.
Sincerelv.
SEGERBERG SOCIATES, ARCHITE,CTS, P.C., A.I.A.
Kurt A. Segerberg, A.I.A.
Principal
Pepi Gramshammer
Bill Reslock
4.
5.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
August25,1997
A request for a final review of a major exterior alteration in CC1, a minor
subdivision and a variance from Section 18.24.130 (density and common area) to
allow for the construction of 8 accommodation units, 1 condominium with a lock-
ott,5,787 square feet of common area and 625 square feet of new retail space at
the Gasthof Gramshammer, located at 231 E. Gore Creek Dr./Part of Lot A. Block
58, VailVillage 1st Filing
Applicant Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt SegerbergPlanner: George Ruther
DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUESTS
The applicant, Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt Segerberg of Pierce, Segerberg,
& Associates, is requesting a final review by the Planning and Environmental Commission
(PEC) forg exterior Core 1 Zone District (CCl). a
mrnor su
To facilitate lhe proposed hotel addition, a minor subdivision of the property between the
Gasftof Gramshammer and the Creekside Building (Pepi's Parcel) is necessary. The
applicant is proposing a minor subdivision to redefine the size of "Pepi's Parcel". The
minor subdivision will relocate the common property between the Creelside Building and
Pepi's Parcel.relocation of the common line will result in a net increase in
.5 square 1eeu0.0156 acres
and a net decrease in the same.
The hotel addition to the Gasthof Gramshammer is proposed on the existing surface
parking area located between the Gasthof Gramshammer and the Creekside
Condominium Building.addition will
to twentv (20) vehicles. 625 of
BACKGROUND
On February 24,1997, Pepi Gramshammer, submitted an application for a major exterior
alteration and a minor subdivision to the Gasthof Gramshammer. Upon preliminary
review of the proposal, it was determined by staff that the removal of the exisiing, legal,
non-conforming, unslruclured (surface), off-street parking area and subsequent
construction of a structured off-street parking area constituted a change in land use, and
therefore, the property must be brought into compliance with the development regulations
prescribed in the MunicipalCode.
. On April 14, 1997, the Planning and Environmental Commission upheld ( 6-1 Bishop
opposed) an appeal of an administrative decision regarding the applicant's proposal,
finding that,
"A private and public unstructured (surface) off-street vehicle parking iSg
different land use than private and public structured (undergrouncl/enclosed) off-
street vehicle parking."
and therefore, the property must be brought into compliance with the development
regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code, or a change of non-conforming use must
be approved by the Vail Town Gouncil.
. On May 6, 1997, the Vail Town Council approved (5-1 Johnston opposed) a request for a
change of non-conforming use, thus allowing for the construction ol an underground
parking structure, with one condition. The Council's condition restricts the on-site vehicle
parking to no more than twenty (20)vehicles.
. On May 12, 1997, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a worksession
meeting with the applicant to discuss the proposed hotel addition. The PEC was in
general agreement with the plans submitted by the applicant. The PEC indicated that the
increased density proposed by he applicant seemed reasonable, that the excess site
coverage had to be reduced to the maximum allowed by the Municipal Code, that the
applicant had to conform with the maximum height limitations, and that construction was
prohibited in the Gore Creek floodplain and the 50'stream setback, unless othenarise
provided by the Municipal Code. The PEC lurther indicated that the proposed minor
subdivision relocating the common property line between the Gasthof Gramshammer and
the Creekside BuiEing seemed acceptable.
III. ZONING ANALYSIS
The following analysis summarizes the relevant zoning statistics for this request:
Legal: 231 East Gore Creek Drive/Part of Lot A, Block 5-B, Vail Village
First Filing.Zoning: CommercialCore | (CCl)
Lot Area: 0.224r'. acrel 9,774.8 square feet
Buifdable Area: 0.1642 acrel7,152.3 square leet
Development
Standards:
GRFA:
Common
Allowable Proposed
5,722 sq.ft., or 80o/" 5,722 sq.ft., or 80%
(includes 787 sq.ft.
of common area)
Area:
# of Units
Site Coverage:
Landscaping:
Parking/Loading:
Building Height:
2,003 sq.ft., or 35%
4 DU'S
5,722 sq.ft., or 80%
no net reduction
in existing landscaping
eleven parking spaces
& one loading berth
40olo = 33'- 43'
60% = 33'or less
5,000 sg.ft., ot 87oA
of allowable GRFA
5 DU's (1 DU & 8 AU's)
5,719 sq.ft., or 80%
no net reduction
in existing landscaping
eleven parking spaces
& one loading berth
40o/"=33'-43'
60% = 33'or less
(42.5 maximum)
IV. MINOR SUBDIVISION CRITERIA
One of the basic premises ol subdivision regulations is that the minimum standards for the
creation of a new lot must be met. This project will be reviewed under the Minor Subdivision
Criteria, pursuant to Chapter 17, Subdivision Regulations, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code.
The tirst set of review criteria to be considered by the Planning and Envlronmental
commassion for a Minor subdivision Application are as follows:
A. Lot Area - The minimum lot or site area shall be five thousand square feet of
buildable area. The proposed lot area will be 7 ,152 square feet of buildable area
and9,774 square feet total, and therefore, this criteria has been met. The
Creekside parcel will continue to meet the lot area requirement.
B. Frontage - Each lot in the CCI Zone District shall have a minimum frontage of
thirty (30) feet. The proposed lot has slightly more than thirty feet of frontage
(31.21'), and therefore this criteria has been mel
C. Site Dimensions -Unlike other zone districts which require minimum site
dimensions and configurations, the CCI Zone District does not require minimum
site dimensions.
The second set of revaew criteria to be considered with a minor subdivision request are as
outlined in the subdivision regulatlons, and are as follows:
"The burden of proof shall rest with the applicant to show that the application is in
compliance with the intended purpose of Chapter 17, the Zoning Ordinance and other
pertinent regulations that the PEC deems applicable. Due consideration shall be given to
the recommendations by public agencies, utility companies and other agencies consulted
under Section 17.16,090. The PEC shall review the application and consider its
appropriateness in regard to Town policies related to subdivision control, densities
proposed, regulations, ordinances and resolutions and other applicable documents,
effects on the aesthetics of the Town, environmental integrity and compatibility with
surrounding uses "
The subdivision purpose statements are as follows:
1. To inform each subdivider of the standards and criteria by which development and
proposals will be evaluated and to provide information as to the type and extent of
improvements required.
Staff Response: One of fre underlying purposes of subdivision regulations, as
well as any development control, is to establish basic ground rules which the statf,
the PEC, the applicant and ihe community can follow in the public review process.
The review of this request will tollow the regulations prescribed for minor
subdivisions in the Municipal Code.
2. To provide for the subdivision of property in the future without conflict with development
on adjacent properties.
Staff Response: The applicants lot is bound on three sides by developed
property and by Gore Creek on the fourth side. Pursuant to the development
standards prescribed for the CC'l Zone District, each of the developed properties,
with the exception of the Creekside Building, have been developed up to their
common property lines. The Creekside Building could potentially be expanded
within their property boundaries. The staff does not believe that the proposed
minor subdivision will negatively impact or conflict with future development on
adjacent properties. To ensure that future conflicts do not arise, access
easements and agreements have been platted prior to this minor subdivision
application.
3. To protect and conserve the value of land throughout the municipality and the value of
buildings and improvements on the land.
Statf Response: Staff does not believe that the applicant's request will negatively
impact the value of land in the Town of Vail generally, or in the immediate area
specifically. The applicant's minor subdivision is in compliance with the Town of
Vail Land Use Plan.
4. To insure that suMivision of property is in compliance with the Town Zoning Ordinance,
lo achieve a harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land uses, consistent
with municipal development objectives.
Statf Response: Staff does not believe that the minor subdivision will negatively
impact the desired harmonious, convenient, workable relationship among land
uses, consistent with municipal development objectives.
5. To guide public and private policy and action in order to provide adequate and efficient
transportation, water, sewage, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreational and other public
requirements and facilities and generally to provide that public facilities will have sufficient
capacity to serve the proposed subdivision.
Stttff Resoonse: Staff does not believe the requested minor subdivision will have
any adverse impacts on any of the above-described criteria.
6.To provide lor accurate legal descriptions of newly subdivided land and to establish
reasonable and desirable construction, design standards and procedures.
Statl Response: As required, the applicant has submitted a final plat prepared by
a land surveyor licensed to practice in Colorado. The final plat shall be required to
be executed by signature of allthe appropriate parties and officially recorded by
the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's office.
To prevent the pollution of air, streams, and ponds, to insure adequacy of drainage
facilities, to safeguard the water table and encourage the wise use and management of
natural resources throughout the municipality in order to preserve the integrity, stability
and beauty ol the community and the value of land.
Staff Response: Staff does not believe the proposed minor subdivision will have
any negative impacts on the above-described criteria.
V. IIAJOR EXTERIOR ALTERATION CRITERIA
The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by the Town of Vail Municipal
Code. The emphasis of this review is on the proposal's compatibility with the zoning code, the
Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, the VailVillage Urban Design Guide Plan, the Vail Village
Design Considerations and the Vail Comprehensive Plan.
A. Compliance with the Town ot Vail Zoning Code
Pursuant to Section 18.24.010 of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the purpose of the
Commercial Core 1 Zone District is.
"To provide sites and 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 'l Zone 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
pedestrian ways and public greenways, and to ensure continuation of the building
scale and architectural qualities that distinguish the Village."
. Stafl Response:
A complete zone check was completed for the proposed Gasthof Gramshammer
addition. Staff has concluded that the proposal is in compliance with the purpose
of the GCI Zone District and the development standards prescribed for the site,
with the exception of common area and density. The applicant has requested
variances from the common area and density standards. Please see Sections | &
Vl of this memorandum for details on the variance requests and staffs review of
the variance criteria and findings.
7.
B.Gomoliance with the Vail Village Urban D,esign Guide Plan
The VailVillage Urban Design Guide Plan was adopted by ttre Town of Vail on
June 11, 1980. The Guide Plan is intended to suggest the nature of the
improvements desired for Vail Village and to guide current planning in both the
public and private sectors.
The Gasthof Gramshammer is located within the Gore Creek Drive/Bridge Street
Sub-area. According to the plan, the only urban design concept affecting the
applicant's property is the construction of the Gore Creek Streamwalk. The plan
suggests the construction of the streamwalk from Lionshead to Ford Park.
. Staff Response:
c.
The construction of a streamwalk through the Village Core was discussed at
length during the review process of the Austria Haus SDD (1997) The result of
the discussions with Council concluded that the streamwalk did not need to be
constructed through the Village Core at this time. Staff continues to agree with
this position on the streamwalk and does not believe that an approval of the
applicant's request should include a condition requiring the construction of the
streamwalk.
The relevant portion of the Vail Village Urban Design Guide Plan has been
attached lor reference.
Compliance with the Urban Design Gonsiderations for Vail Village and the
Exterior Alterataon Criteria.
1. URBAN DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
a. PEDESTRIANEANON
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 traftic cannot be removed from certain streets (bus routes,
delivery access), a totally care{ree pedestrian system is not achievable
throughout the entire Village. Therefore, several levels of
pedestrianization have been identified. The level of pedestrianization most
appropriate for the proposed Gasthof Gramshammer development is the
joint vehicle/pedestrian use of the roadrrvay near the Children's Fountain.
. Staff Response:
Statf does not believe that pedestrianization will be negatively impacted by
the proposed development. The existing development site is currently
used for guest parking. The new addition will slightly increase the number
of vehicle trips to the Gasthol Gramshammer, but the increase should not
be detrimental to the pedestrian nature of the Village.
b. VEHICLE PENETRANON
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.
. Staff Response:
As discussed in Section ll of this memorandum, on May 6, 1997, the Town
Council approved a change of non-conforming use allowing the applicant
to construct an underground parking structure beneath the proposed hotel
addition. The approval permits the applicant to park up to twenty (20)
vehicles in the structure.
In addition to vehicles entering the Village Core to park at the Gasthof
Gramshammer, here can be an expected increase in loading and
deliveries to the hotel. The increase in loading and delivery is anticipated
to be proportionate to the increase in hotel use. The increase is expected
to be mininal and will not negatively impact the Village Core.
C. STREETSCAPE FBAITIEWORK
To improve the quality of the walking experience and give continuity to the
pedestrian ways, as a continuous system, two 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 open and in a
somewhat undefined condition evident in many other areas of Vail.
d.
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.
. Staff Response:
The development of the site between the Gasthof Gramshammer and the
Creekside Building will better define the perimeter of the Children's
Fountain Plaz a. Staff believes that by better defining the perimeter of the
Children's Fountain Plaza, the pedesfrian experience in the vicinity of the
Gasthof Gramshammer will be significantly improved. Replacement of the
surface parking lot will enhance the pedestrian character of the area and
create an improved public space.
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 1/2 as high as the width of lhe 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 lo 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 comtortableness of the enclosure
being created.
In some inslances, 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 segments in a north/south direction.
Long canyon streets in an easVwest 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" etfect.
Canopies, awnings, arcades and buibing extensions can all create a
pedestrian focus and divert attention from the upper building heights and
"canyon" effect.
e.
. Staff Response:
The proposed addition to the Gasthof Gramshammer complies with the
building height limitations prescribed for rhe Village. The building has
been designed to "step down" towards the Children's Fountain and the
Creekside Building. The "stepping down" of the building insures a
comfortable pedestrian experience and does not result in an undesirable
"canyon" effect at the property line. The greatest impact of the addition
will be on the views from the residential units in the northeast corner of the
Creekside Building. The applicant's architect has taken steps to reduce
the impact by incorporating a lower, flat roof design on the portion of the
addition nearest the neighboring residential units.
STBEET EDGE
Buildings in the Village core should form a strong but irregular edge to the
street.
Unlike many the Towns other zone districts, 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 lrontage along the property line. A
strong street edge is important lor 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 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 plantings, raised
sidewalks, texture changes in ground surface, arcades and raised decks.
Plazas, patios, and green areas are important focal points for gathering,
resting, orienting and should be disfibuted throughout the Village with due
consideration to spacing, sun access, opportunities for views and
pedestrian activity.
. Statf Resoonse:
The street frontage ol the new addition is approximately twenty feet (20') in
length and is in different horizontal and vertical planes, than the existing
Gasthof Gramshammer and the Creekside Building. Staff believes the
proposed addition will have positive impacts on the street frontage in the
Village.
g.
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.
. Staff Response:
As mentioned previously, the building height of the addition complies with
the requirements of the Municipal Code prescribed for the CCI Zone
District. The 6tr/J40o/o roof height requirement for the Village results in
variations in heights and massing of the addition.
VIEWS AND FOCAL POINTS
Vail's mountain/valley setting is a fundamental part of its identity. Views of
the mountiains, 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 references and visual focal points. The most
signilicant view corridors in the Village have been adopted as part of
Ghapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. The view conidors 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 lhe 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 conidor, unless approved under Chapter '18.73. Adopted
corridors are listed in Chapter 18.73 of the Vail Municipal Code. Whether
aflecting adopted view conidors or not, the impact ot proposed
development on views from public ways and public spaces must be
identified and considered where appropriate.
. Staff Response:
The proposed hotel addition does not encroach into any of the five
adopted view corridors in the Village, nor will it obstruct views from public
spaces to any major visual focal points, To a limited degree, the addition
will block the existing view trom the Children's Fountain Plaza area north
to Gore Creek. Overall, statf believes the proposal complies with the view
point criteria.
l0
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
(SiEmarUGore Creek Plaza, Village Center, Vail Village Inn).
Consideration should be given to extending these coridors, where
feasible, and the creation ol new ones. As buildings are constructed or
remodeled, the opportunity may exist to develop segments of a future
system.
. Staff Besoonse:
Presently, trash from the Gasthol Gramshammer is picked up from a fully-
screened trash enclosure on the west side ol the building, south of the
front entry. Food service deliveries to the restaurant are made directly
from Gore Creek Drive. The applicant is not proposing a change to the
existing delivery and trash removal plans. Staff believes the existing plan
functions as well as can be expected given the central location of the
Gasthof Gramshammer in the Village, and we do not see a reason to
amend the plan as a result of the proposed addition.
SUN/SHADE
Due to Vail's alpine climate, sun is an important comfort factor, especially
in winter, lall 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.
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-ol-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 ol buildings. Limited height exceptions may be
granted to meet this criteria.
ll
. Staff Response:
Due to the location of the addition and the existing conditions of the site,
staft did not require the completion of a sun/shade analysis. Staff does
not anticipate any negative impacts to the sun/shade locations in the
Village as a result ol the hotel addition.
2. ARCHITECruRAULANDSCAPE CONSIDERANONS.
a. ROOFS
Where visible, roofs are often one of the most dominant architectural
elements in any built environment. In the Village, roof form, color and
texture are visibly dominant, and generally consistent, which tends to unify
the building diversity to a great degree.
The current expression, and objective, for roofs in lhe Village is to form a
consistently unifying backdrop for the architecture and pedestrian
streetscape, and to avoid roofs which tend to stand out individually or
distract visually from the overall character.
Roof Forms
Roofs within the Village are typically gable in form and of moderate-tolow
pitch. Shed roofs are frequently used for small additions to larger
buildings. Free-standing shed roofs, butterfly roofs and flat roofs, can be
lound in the Village, but they are generally considered to be out of
character. Hip roofs likewise, are rare and generally inconsistent with the
character of the Core Area. Towers are exceptions, in both form and
pitch, to the general criteria, but do have an established local vemacular-
style which should be respected.
. Staff Response:
The roof form of the Gasthof Grasmshammer addition has been revised
several times from what was originally proposed. The original roof design
had signilicantly more sloping roof area than flat roof area. The majority ol
flat roof area has been added to insure the addition complies with the
building height restrictions (60i40 ratio) and to preserve views out of the
neighboring residential units.
Pitch
Roof slopes in the Village typically range from 3112to 6/12, with slightly
steeper pitches in limited applications. Again, for visual consistency this
generaf 3112-6112 range should be preserved.
. Stiaff Response:
The pitch of the sloping portions of the roofs on the proposed Gastof
Gramshammer addition is 5,5/12 and is in compliance with this guideline.
t2
Overhangs
Generous roof overhangs are also an established architectural feature in
the Village - a traditional expression of shelter in alpine environments,
Roof overhangs typically range from 3 to 6 feet on all edges. Specific
design consideration should be given to protection of pedestrian ways
adjacent to buildings. Snow slides and runoff hazards can be reduced by
roof orientation, guners, arcades, etc.
Overhang details are treated with varying degrees of ornamenlation.
Structural elements such as roof beams are expressed beneath the
overhangs, simply or decoratively carved. The roof fascia is thick and
wide, giving a substantial edge to the roof.
. Staff Response:
Statl suggests that the applicant increase the roof overhangs on the
addition where possible. Currenfly, the overhangs vary from two leet to
three feet. Staff would like to see all the roof overhangs at least three feet.
Statf will review this consideration with the Design Review Board.
Compositions
The intricate roofscape of the Village as a whole is the result of many
individual simple roof configurations. For any single building a varied, but
simple composition of roof planes is preferred to either a single or a
complex arrangement of many roofs. As individual roofs become more
complex, the roof attracts visual attention away from the streetscape and
the total roolscape tends toward "busyness" rather than a backdrop
composition.
. Staff Response:
The roof form on the Gasthol Gramshammer addition would be considered
a grouping of a simple composition of roof planes. Staff believes the roof
composition proposed by the applicant is consistent with the intent ol this
architectural consideration.
Steooed Roofs
As buildings are stepped to reflect existing grade changes, resulting roof
steps should be made where the height change will be visually significant.
Variations which are too subtle appear to be more stylistic than functional,
and out of character with the more straight-fonrard roof design typical in
the Village.
. Staff Response:
The development site is relatively flat (by Vail standards). While the
building does not need to step to follow the topography, vertical and
horizontal steps have been incorporated into the roof design. The vertical
l3
and horizontal steps provide a reduction in the overall mass of the building
and add to the architectural and visual interest of the addition.
Materials
Wood shakes, wood shingles, and built-up tar and gravel are almost
exclusively used as roof materials in the Village. For visual consistency,
any other materials should have the appearance of the above.
. Staff Resoonse:
The applicant is proposing to wood shakes on the sloping portions of the
roof of the addtion and gravel on the flat portions. The staff believes these
are appropriate roof materials to use on this project.
Construction
Common roof problems and design considerations in this climate include:
- snowslides onto pedestrian walks
- gutters freezing
- roof dams and water infiltration
- heavy snow loads
Careful attention to these functional details is recommended, as well as
familiarity with the local building code, proven construction details, and
Town ordinances.
For built-up roofs, pitches ot 4112 or steeper do not hold gravel well. For
shingle roofs, pitches ot 4112 or shallower often result in ice dams and
backflow leakage under the shingles.
Cold-roof construction is strongly prefened, unless warm-roof benefits for
a specific application can be demonstrated. Cold-roofs are double-roofs
which insulate and prevent snow melt from internal building heat. By
retaining snow on the roof, many of the problems listed can be reduced.
Periodic snow removal will be required and should be anticipated in the
design.
Rool gutters tend to ice-in completely and become inetlective in the Vail
climate, especially in shaded north-side locations. Heating the interior
circumference with heat-tape elements or other devices is generally
necessary to assure adequate run-off control in colder months.
. Stiaff Resoonse:
Through the review of a building permit, staff will ensure that tl.te roof
construction complies with the standards prescribed for the Vail climate.
t4
b. FACADES
Materials
Stucco, brick, wood (and glass) are the primary building materials found in
the Village. While not wishing to restrict design freedom, existing
conditions show that within this small range of materials much variation
and individuality are possible while preserving a basic harmony. Too many
diverse materials weaken the continuity and repetition which unifies the
streetscape.
Of the above materials, stucco is the most consistently used material.
Most ol the buildings in the Village exhibit some stucco, and there are
virtually no areas where stucco is entirely absent. lt is intended to
preserve the dominance of stucco by its use in portions, at least, of all new
facades, and by assuring that other materials are not used to the exclusion
of stucco in any sub-area within the Village.
. Staff Response:
The exterior materials proposed forthe Gasthof Gramsahmmer addition
are a combination of stone, stucco and wood. No one material is
proposed to dominate the exterior of the addition. Staff believes the
applicant has complied with this particular architectural consideration.
Color
There is greater latitude in the use of color in the Village, but still a
discernible consistency within a general range of colors.
For wood surfaces, trim or siding, darker color tones are preferred -
browns, greys, blue-greys, dark olive, slategreens, etc. Stucco colors are
generally light - white, beige, pale{old, or other light pastels. Other light
colors could be appropriate, as considered on a case-by-case basis.
Bright colors (red, orange, blues, maroon, etc.) should be avoided for
major wall planes, but can be used effectively (with restraint) for
decorative trim, wall graphics, and other accent elements.
Generally, to avoid both "busyness," and weak visual interest, the variety
of major wall colors should not exceed four, nor be less than two.
A color/material change between the ground floor and upper floors is a
common and effective reinforcement of he pedestrian scale of the street.
. Staff Response:
The applicant has proposed an enerior building color that is compatible
with the color of the existing building and with the buildings in the vicinity
of the Gasthof Gramshammer. Statf would like to point out that the
applicant is required to obtain Design Review Board (DRB) approval prior
t0 conslruction, and that any concerns of the PEG on this topic will be
brought to the attention of the DRB.
l5
Transparency
Pedestrian scale is created in many ways, but a major factor is the
openness, attractiveness, and generally public character of the ground
floor facade of adjacent buildings. Transparent store fronts are "people
attractors,' opaque or solid walls are more private, and imply 'do not
approach."
On pedestrian-oriented streets such as in the Village, ground floor
commercial facades are proportionately more transparent ttran upper
floors. Upper floors are typically more residential, prlvate and thus less
open.
As a measure of transparency, the most characteristic and successful
ground floor facades range lrom 55% to 70o/o ol the total length of the
commercial facade. Upper floors are often the converse, 307"-45T"
transparent.
Examples ol transparency (lineal feet of glass to lineal feet of facade) on
ground level.
- Covered Bridge Building 58%- Pepi's Sports 71%- Gasthof Gramshammer 48%- The Lodge 66%- Golden Peak House 62V"- Casino Building 30/"- Clock Tower Building 51%- Austria Haus 55o/"
. Staff Response:
Windows
In addition to the general degree of transparency, window details are an
important source of pedestrian scale-giving elements. The size and shape
of windows are often a response to the function of the adiacent street. For
close-up, casual, pedestrian viewing, windows are typically sized to human
dimensions and characteristics of human vision. (Large glass-wall store-
fronts suggest unintenupted viewing, as from a moving car. The sense of
intimate pedestrian scale is diminished). Ground floor display windows are
typically raised slightly 18 inches + and do not extend much over 8 feet
above the walkway level. Ground floors, which are noticeably above or
below grade, are exceptions.
The articulation of the window itself is still another element in giving
pedestrian scale (human-related dimensions). Glass areas are usually
subdivided to express individual window elements - and are further
subdivided by mullions into small panes - which is responsible for much of
the old-world charm of the Village. Similarly, windows are most often
clustered in banks, juxtaposed with plain wall surfaces to give a pleasing
rhythm, Horizontal repetition of single window elements, especially over
long distances, should be avoided.
l6
Large single pane windows occur in the Village, and provide some
contrast, as long as they are generally consistent in form with other
windows. Long continuous glass is out of character. Bay, bow and box
windows are common window details, which lurther variety and massing to
lacades - and are encouraged.
Reflective glass, plastic panes, and aluminum or other metal frames are
not consistent in the Village and should be avoided. Metal-clad or plastic-
clad wood frames, having the appearance of painted wood have been
used successfully and are acceptable.
. Statf Response:
The proposed addition has no commercial space located along the street
frontage, and therefore, has no street-level pedestrian-oriented glass. The
windows on the upper lloors will be wood with mullions to divide the panes
of glass. Staff believes the use of wood windows with mullions adds to
the architectural charm and visual integrity of the Gasthof Gramshammer.
Staff recommends that the use of mullions in the windows be a condition
of approval.
Doors
Like windows, doors are important to character and scale-giving
architectural elements. They should also be somewhat transparent (on
retail commercial lacades) and consistent in detailing with windows and
other facade elements.
Doors with glass contribute to overall facade transparency. Due to the
visibility of people and merchandise inside, windowed doors are somewhat
more effective in drawing people inside to retail commercial facades.
Afthough great variations exist, 25-300/" t transparency is felt to be a
minimum transparency objective. Private residences, lodges, restaurants,
and other non-retail establishments have different visibility and character
needs, and doors should be designed accordingly. Sidelight windows are
also a means of introducing door-transparency as a complement or
substitute for door windows.
Articulated doors have the decorative quality desired for Vail. Flush doors,
light aluminum frames, plastic applique elements all are considered
inappropriate. As an expression of entry, and sheltered welcome,
protected entry-ways are encouraged. Doorways may be recessed,
extended, or covered.
. Statf Response:
Staff believes the applicant's proposalcomplies with the above-described
criteria.
Trim
Prominent wood trim is also a unifying feature in the Village. Particularly
at ground floor levels, doors and windows have strong, contrasting framing
l7
elements, which tie the various elements together in one composition.
Windows and doors are treated as strong visual features. Glass-wall
detailing for either is typically avoided.
. Staff Resoonse:
Staff believes the applicant's proposal complies with the above-described
criteria.
c. DECKS AND PATIOS
Dining decks and patios, when properly designed and sited, bring people
to the streets, opportunities to look and be looked at, and generally
contribute to the liveliness of a busy street-making a richer pedestrian
experience than il those streets were empty.
. Staff Besponse:
The Gasthof Gramshammer already has one of the most successful and
popular dining decks in the Village. The proposed addition will have no
negative impact on the existing deck. No new dining dec](s or patios are
proposed with this application.
d. BALCONIES
Balconies occur on almost all buildings in the Village which have at least a
second level facade wall. As strong repetitive features they:
- give scale to buildings.
- give life to the street (when used).
- add variety to building forms.
- provide shelter to pathways below.
. Staff Response:
The majority of the balconies (decks) on the Gashtol Gramshammer
addition are located on the south, west and north sides of the building.
The balconies are for the use of the guests of the Gasthof Gramshammer
and not the general public.
Color
They contrast in color (dark) with the building, typically matching the trim
colors.
. Staff Response:
Like the exterior colors of the building, the DRB will be reviewing this
aspect of the proposal.
l8
e.
Size
They extend lar enough from the building to cast a prominent shadow
pattern. Balconies in Vail are functional as will as decorative. As such,
they should be of useable size and located to encourage use. Balconies
less than six feet deep are seldom used, nor are those always in shade,
not oriented to views or street life.
. Staff Response:
Staff believes this criteria has been met.
Mass
They are commonly massive, yet semi-transparent, distinctive from the
building, yet allowing the building to be somewhat visible behind. Solid
balconies are lound occasionally, and tend to be too dominant obscuring
the building architecture. Light balconies lack the visual impact which ties
the Village together.
. Staff Response:
The balconies on the addition are proposed to be semi-transparent in
appearance.
Materials
Wood balconies are by far the most common. Vertical structural members
are the most dominant visually, often decoratively sculpted. Decorative
wrought iron balconies are also consistent visually where the vertical
members are close enough to create semi-transparency. Pipe rails, and
plastic, canvas or glass panels should be avoided.
. Staff Response:
The malerial to be used in the construction of the balconies on the addition
will be wood, wifi vertical structural members. A detail of the railing will
be reviewed by the DRB.
ACCENT ELEilENTS
The life, and festive quality of the Village is given by judicious use of
accent elements which give color, movement and contrast to the Village.
Colorful accent elements consistent with existing character are
encouraged, such as:
Awnings and canopies - canvas, bright color or stripes of two colors.
Flags, banners -hanging from buildings, poles, and even
across streets for special occasions.
Umbrellas -
Annual color flowers -
over tables on outdoor patios.
in beds or in planters.
l9
f.
Accent lighting'
Christmas lights all winter),
Painted wallgraphics -
Fountains -
character.
. Stlff Response:
buildings, plazas, windows, trees (even
coats of arms, symbols, compositions,etc.
sculptural, with both winter and summer
Accent lighting on the building, annual flowers in flower boxes are
proposed to provide colorful accent elements on the Gasthof
Gramshammer addition. lt is anticipated the new addition will be accented
and appointed as well, if not better than, the existing lodge.
LANDSCAPE ELEMENTS
Landscape considerations include, and go beyond, the placement of
appropriate plant materials.
- plant materials
- paving
- retaining walls
- street furniture (benches, kiosks, trash, etc.)
- lighting
- signage
Plant Materials
Opportunities for planting are not extensive in the Village, which places a
premium on the plant selection and design of the sites that do exist.
Framework planting of trees and shrubs should include both deciduous
and evergreen species for year roupd continuity and interest.
Native plants are somewhat limited in variety, but are clearly best able to
withstand the harsh winter climate, and to tie the Village visually with its
mounlain setting.
. Staff Response:
A landscape plan has been submitted by the applicant. The proposed
landscape design takes into consideration factors such as the location ol
the plantings (sun/shade), maintenance, climate, etc. Staff believes the
landscape design for the Gasthof Gramshammer addition complies with
the above-described criteria and will be reviewed by the DRB.
Paving
The treeze/thaw cycle at this altitude virtually eliminates common site-cast
concrete as a paving surface (concrete spall). High-strength concrete may
work in selected conditions. Asphalt, brick (on concrete or on sand), and
concrete block appear to be best suited to the area.
In general, paving treatments should be coordinated with that of the
adjacent public right-of-way. The Town uses the following materials for all
new construction:
20
- asphalt: general use pedestrian streets
- brick on concrete: feature areas (plazas, intersections, fountains, etc.)
. Staff Response:
The paving material used in the public areas around the addition will be
the "Vail blend", concrete unit paver, laid in the "Vail-pattern" (herringbone)
with a double soldier course edge. These surfaces will be heated and will
include the access ramp to the parking structure and the front entry drop-
off area.
Retaining walls
Retaining walls, to raise planting areas, often protects the landscape from
pedestrians and snowplows, and should provide seating opportunities:
Two types of materials are already well established in the Village and
should be utilized lor continuity:
- split-face moss rock veneer - Village Core pedestrian streets (typical).
- rounded cobble hidden mortar - in open space areas if above type not
already established nearby.
. Staff Response:
Landscape retaining walls are proposed in the construction of the Gasthof
Gramshammer. The new landscape retaining walls will match the existing
walls in terms ot both type of materials, and application.
Liqhting
Light standards should be coordinated with those used by the Town in the
public right-of-way,
. Staff Response:
No streetscape lighting is required with this request.
Signaoe
Refer to Town of Vail Signage Ordinance.
. Stafl Response:
No new signs are proposed with this application
Comoliance with the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan.
Upon review of lhe Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, staff has determined
that no recommended improvements or opportunities are directly related to the
applicant's proposal.
D.
21
Compliance tvith the Vail Comprehensive plan
Vail Village Master Plan
The Vail Village Master Plan has been adopted as an element of the Vail
Comprehensive Plan. The Vail Village Master Plan 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. Most importantly, the Vail Village Master Plan shall serve
as a guide to the statf, review boards, and Town Council in analyzing future
proposals lor development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances to
deal with such developmenl. For he citizens and guests of Vail, the Master Plan
provides a clearly stated set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will
grow in the future. Upon review of the Vail Village Master Plan, the staff believes
the following goals, objectives and policies are relevant to the applicant's request:
Goal#1 Encourage high quality redevelopment white presenring the unique
architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of
community and identity.
1.1 Objective: lmplement a consistent Development Review Process to
reinforce the character of the Village.
1.1 .1 Policy: Development and improvement projects approved in
the Village shall be consistent with the goals,
objectives, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
1.2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential
and commercial facilities.
Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year-round economic
health and viability tor the Village and tor the community as a whole.
2.1 Objective:Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub-
areas throughout the Village and allow for development that
is compatible with these established land use patterns.
Increase the number of residential units available for short-
term, overnight accommodations.
2.3.1 Policy: The development of short-term accommodation
units is strongly encouraged. Residential units that
are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed in a manner
thal makes them available lor short-term overnight
rental.
23-Ablectue..
11
2.5 Obiective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to
better serve the needs ol our guests.
2.5.1 Policy: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting
facilities and other amenities shall be preserved and
enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of lodging
properties.
Goal *11 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of thewalking
exporience throughout the Village.
3.2 Obiective: Minimize the amount ol vehicular traffic in the Village to the
greatest extent possible.
3.2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedestrianized areas ol he Village.
Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, elliciency and aesthetlcs of the
transportation and circulation system throughout the village.
5.1 Objective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking
facilities.
5.1 .3 Policy: Seek locations for additional structured public and
private parking.
5.1.5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly
encouraged to provide underground or visually
concealed parking.
5.2 Objective: Encourage the use of public transportation to minimize the
use of private automobiles throughout Vail.
5.2.2 Policy: The Town shall facilitate and encourage the
operation of private shuttle vans outside of the
pedestrianized core area.
5.3 Obiective: Concentrate the majority of interconnecting transit activity
at the periphery of the Village to minimize vehicular tratfic in
pedestrianized areas.
5.3.1 Policy: The VailTransportation Center shall be the primary
pick up and drop off point for public transit and
private shuttle vans and taxis.
Goal *6 To insure the continuod improvement of the vatal operatlonal elements
of tho village.
23
o
6.1 Objective:Provide service and delivery lacilities for existing and new
development.
6.2 Objective: Provide for the safe and efficient functions of fire, police
and public utilities within the context of an aesthetically
pleasing resort setting.
6.2.1 Policy: Development projects and other improvements in
VailVillage shall be reviewed by respective Town
departments to identify both the impacts of the
proposal and potential mitigating measures.
The Vail Village Master Plan contains a Parking and Circulation Plan. The parking and
Circulation Plan recognizes the established pattern ot parking and circulation throughout
the Village. The parking and circulation system is an important element in maintaining
the pedestrianized character of the Village. This is to be accomplished by limiting
vehicular access at strategic points, while allowing lor necessary operations such as bus
service, loadingidelivery and emergency access.
The Gasthof Gramshammer is in many ways unique. The hotel was built in the center of
the Village prior to the adoption of zoning in Vail and the formulation and adoption of the
Vail Village Master Plan. As discussed in Section ll ol this memorandum, the Vail Town
Gouncil approved a request by the applicant to change an existing non-conforming use (a
surface parking area), to another non-conforming use (an underground parking structure).
The underground parking structure proposed by the applicant is designed to
accommodate as many on-site parking spaces as possible. To maximize the number of
on-site parking spaces, the applicant is proposing valet parking. The applicant is
proposing eleven parking spaces in the underground structure.
The Parking and Circulation Plan also discusses pedestrian circulation as a lunctional
consideration of the plan. A long standing goal for the Village has been to improve the
pedestrian experience through the development of a network of walltways and paths. A
path of significant importance and identified in various planning documents is the
streamwalk. The streamwalk expansion has been contemplated to be constructed across
the applicant's property to achieve a pedestrian link between the Covered Bridge pocket
park and the Gore Creek Promenade. However, the timing on the construction of the
streamwalk, if it is ever to occur. is uncertain.
A Building Height Plan is an element of the Vail Village Master Plan. The goal of the
Building Height Plan is to maintain the concentration of low-scale buildings in the core
area of the Village, while positioning taller buildings along the Village's northern periphery.
According to the Building Height Plan, the Gasthof Gramshammer is located in an area of
the Village intended upon having buildings with a maximum range of 3-4 stories in height.
A story is defined in the Plan as nine feet of height, not including the roof.
Lastly, the Vail Village Master Plan defines ten sub-areas within the Village Core area.
The purpose of defining the ten sub-areas in the plan is to idenlify and be sensitive to the
opportunities and constraints that may exist on a site specific basis. The ten sub-area
concepts are meant to serve as advisory guidelines for land use decisions by the PEC
and the Town Council.
24
I
vt.
The Gasthof Gramshammer is located in sub-areas #3-6 and tr3-7. The opportunities for
development identified in sub-area #3-6 are commercial expansion on the west side ol
the Gasthof Gramshammer, The intent of the commercial expansion is to improve the
enclosure proportions of the Children's Fountain area and to enhance the existing plaza
with greenspace. The opportunities for sub-Area #3-6 have special emphasis on plan
objectives 2.2, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6,3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1.
Sub-area #3-7 is identified as the Village Streamwalk Study Area. The area is identified
as an area to study the opportunities of a low-impact, walking-only path along Gore Creek
between the Covered Bridge and Vail Road, connecting to an existing streamwalk, further
enhancing the pedestrian network throughout the Village and providing public access to
the creek. The specific design and location ol the wall<way shall be sensitive to adjacent
uses and the creek environment. Special emphasis shall be given to plan objectives 3.4
and4.2.
DENSITY and GOMMON AREA VARIANCE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review ol Section 18.62.060, Criteria and Findings, of the Town of Vail Municipal Code, the
community Development Department recommends appro\ral of the requested density and
common area variances. The recommendation for approval is based on the following factors:
Consideration ol Factors:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or
potential uses and structuros in the vicinity.
Density:
The Gasthof Gramshammer is located in the center of Vail Village, The
majorlty of the area defined as Vail Village is zoned Commercial Core l.
As previously mentioned, the intent of the Gommercial Core I Zone District
is to provide sites in Town for lodges and commercial establishments.
Staft believes the applicant's request for a density variance will have a
positive relationship with the other existing or potential uses in the vicinity
of the Gasthof Gramshammer. The increased density will provide
additional quality lodging opportunities for guests of Vail, and will
therefore, further many ot the Vail Village Master Plan Goals and
Objectives. Increased lodging opportunities benefits the merchants of Vail
particularily and the Town generally.
Gommon Area:
The staff does not believe that the common area variance request will
have any negative impacts on the potential or existing uses and structures
in the vicinity ot the Gasthof Gramshammer.
The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achleve
compatibility and unilormity of treatment among sites In the vlclnlty or
to attain the obiectivss of this fitle without grant of speclal prlvllege.
1.
2.
)\
Density:
According to section 18.24,130 of the Municipal code of the Town of Vail,
tha maximum allowable density for the proposed development site is four
(4) clwelling units (25 dwelling units per buiHabb acre X 0.1642 buildable
acres). The applicant is proposing to construct eight (8) accommodation
units and one (1 ) dwelling unit. For density calculation purposes, an
accommodation unit counts as'l12 ot a dwelling unit. Therefore, the
applicant is proposing five (5) dwelling units [(8 A.U. x 1/2) + 1 D.U.)].
The applicant's lot is significantly impacted by the 100-year floodptain.
Approximately 27"/" or 2,622.5 square feet ot the lot is located within the
floodplain, and therefore, unbuildable pursuant to Seciton 18.69.040 of the
Municipal Code. Staff believes that the floodplain is a physical hardship
and that relief from the density regulation should be granted. Staff
believes the request to increase the allowable density on the property to
five dwelling units is reasonable and will not be detrimental to the public
health, salety, or welfare. The applicant is not requesting any additional
density beyond that which would othenrise be permitted if the entire lot
were buildable. The staff believes the applicant is requesting the minimum
amount of relief necessary in order to achieve compatibility and uniformity
among sites zoned Commercial Core l.
Common Area:
Pursuant to Section 18.04.130(B) of the Municipal Code of the Town of
Vail, commons area is defined as, in part,
"The areas excluded from calculation as GRFA including:
1. Enclosed garages to accommodate on-site parking.2. All or part of the following spaces, provided such
spaces are common spaces and that the total
square footage ol all the spaces does not exceed
thirty{ive percent (35"/d of the allowable GRFA on
the lot.a. Common hallways, stairuays, elevator
shafts and airlocks;b. Common lobby areas;
Common enclosed recreation facililies;
Common mechanical equipment space;
Common closets and storage areas;
Meeting and convention lacilities;
Office space."
Based upon the common area definition, the maximum allowable common
area in the proposed hotel addition is 35% of the allowable GRFA on the
lot or 2,003 square feet. The applicant is proposing to construct
approximately 5,787 square feet of common area. The majority of the
common area proposed in the new hotel addition is to accommodate a
c.
d.
e.
f.
s.
26
oi
B.
new recreational facility. According to the applicant, the recreational
facility will serve as an amenity to the guests of the lodge. Cunently, no
recreational facililty amentities are available to the guests of the Gasthof
Gramshammer. The remaining common area square footage is allocated
to accommodating stairways, storage, hallways, mechanical rooms and
olfices.
The staff has worked with the applicant and his representative to minimze
the amount of common area necessary. Several spaces within the
proposed addition have been reduced in size or eliminated with the intent
of minimizing the common area square footage. Staff believes the
applicant is requesting the minimum amount of relief from the common
area regulation necessary to achieve compatibility amongst the applicants
lot and other properties in the Commercial Core I Zone District. Staff
further believes that similar to the density variance request, the common
area variance is warranted due to the physical hardship of the floodplain
and its impacts on the development standard percentages.
3. The eftect ot the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, tr€nsportation and trattic facilitles, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
The proposed variances will have little, if any, etfect on these factors.
The Planning and EnvironmentalCommission shall make the following findings
before grantino 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.
2. That the granting ol the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety or wellare, or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is wananted for one or more of the following reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement ol the specified
regulation would result in practical difliculty or unnecessary
physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply
generally to other properties in the same zone.
c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of
other properties in the same district.
27
o
VII. STAFFRECOMMENDATION:
Minor Subdivision:
The Community Development Department Statf recommends appronal of the of the
applicant's request for a minor subdivision to redefine the size of "Pepi's Parcel" and to
relocate the common property line to both Pepi's Parcel and the Creekside Building.
Staff's recommendation for approval is based upon our review of the request as outlined
in Section lV of the memorandum.
Maior Exterior Alteration :
The Community Development Department recommends appronal of the request for a
major exterior alteration in Commercial Core lto the Gasthof Gramshammer. The
recommendation for approval is based upon the staff's review of the major exterior
alteration criteria outlined in Section V of this memorandum. Staff believes the applicant
has met each of the criteria.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to grant an approval of the
major exterior alteration request, staff would recommend the following conditions:
n/1. That the applicant use mullions in the wood windows and doors to divide thevv panes of glass per the building elvation drawings and that the design be approved
by the Design Review Board.
&.'z
&..x
o9 '4
5.
That the applicant increase all the roof overhangs to at least three feet to increase
the shadeishadow on the building and that a detail of the soffit and fascia be
reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board.
That the applicant submit a detail of the wood balcony pickets and railings to the
Community Development Department and that the detail be reviewed and
approved by the Design Review Board.
That the Design Review Board to review and approve the proposed roof plan.
That the applicant submit a roof-top mechanical equipment plan to the Community
Development Department for review and approval prior to submitting an
application for building permit. lf the Community Development Department does
not staff approve the plan, the plan shall be submitted to the Design Review
Board for review and approval.
Density Varaance:
The Community Development Departmenl recommends approval of the applicant's
request for a density variance to allow for an increase in density from four dwelling units
to five dwelling units. The recommendation for approval is based upon the staff's review
of the variance criteria and tindings outlined in Section Vl of this memorandum. The staff
believes that the density variance should be granted since the granting of the variance
will not constitute a grant of special privilege to the applicant, nor will the granting of the
variance be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or will it be materially
injurious to other properties in the vicinity of the Gasthof Gramshammer. The staff
believes the density variance is warranted for the following reasons:
28 Co.oihars.
1.
2.
Ttre strict literal intepretation of the density regulation will result in a practical
difficulty and unnecessary physical hardship (a large percentage of unbuildable lot
area due to the existence of the 100-year floodplain) inconsistent with the
objectives of the Zoning Code.
There are exceptions and extraordinary conditions (27o/" of the applicant's site is
prohibited from development due to the 100-year floodplain) applicable to the
applicant's site that do not apply generally to other properties in the Commercial
Core lZone District.
Gommon Area Variance:
The Community Development Department recommends approval of the
applicant's request for a common area variance to allow for an increase in
common area from 35% of allowable GRFa to B7o/o ot allowable GRFA within the
Gasthof Gramshammer addition. The recommendation for approval is based
upon the staff's review of the variance criteria and findings outlined in Section Vl
of this memorandum. The statf linds that the common area variance should be
granted, since we believe that the granting of the variance will not constitute a
grant of special privilege to the applicant, nor will fre granting of the variance be
detrimentalto the public health, safety and welfare or will it be materially injurious
to other properties in the Village. The staff believes that the granting of the
common area variance is warranted for the following reasons:
1. The strict literal interpretation of the common area regulation will result in a
practical difficulty (recreational amenities are difficult to provide and
required building code standards are difficult io adequately address) for
the applicant which is inconsistent with the objectives of the Zoning Code.
2- The strict interpretation or enforcement of the common area regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by other lodge owners in
the Commercial Core lZone District.
29
FINAL PLAT
CREEKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER
A REsuBDIvlsIoN oF CREEKSIDE coNDoMINIUMs, lors e,f,g,h,i, AND pARa oF Lor a, BLocK 5_B
VAIL VILLACB FIRST FILING, TOTN OF VAIL EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
i SITE
lriii fr:3:y-:5'J.,r*!fi.1y,i i:1'-.::.:.
t-'i-;i:- i;i;--..'
ai;,t i -$i;rii;i.- .-gE'**"'
i6ii;'A:iiil_ -.. -_-- --.
*'' :::::::::;:::::::::::: ::::
n -..,..- -.-. --...,,-_-..-.-
Siir.::i.:::::::r:'i'i :l;i.:w r"r,.*.,, .
nii;-i'-i:iiii;--.-....
r;_a-d
I
T.t
I
FINAL PLAT
CREEKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER
A RESUBDMSIoN oF CREEKSIDE CONDoMINIUUS, LoTS e,f,s,h,i, AND PART 0F LOT a, BLOCK 5-B
VAIL YII.AGE FIRST FILING, TOTN OF VAIL, EAGT.E COUNTY, COLORADO
;:taiit_iii_-"_""'-"-"'
o
t
L
I
7,/z]lE /f{lE /rt2
lo
t>t!
IB
Fr|
trEIt
lz
It:olfll
t - -rr--_I -----
---^..-
- - ry"--
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER
ADDrTrON
-l
ri;i; iiir iri itqi
i--_._-
,1 /"
I
T'-| ->r-
L
wl,:!i,
,'/)l
..ii I
I
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER
ADDITION
-l
;Fir ilft ll! iF4f
GASTHOF GRAM$HAMMER
ADDTTION
4{r riir il! ift{r
COVERED
BRIDGE
oo , -cooo.oiooo-r-,r\
\-Arg
.Q
ct)
aJo
-_Qaq. I
W
W
PEPI'S
ffi
G
Wq
'=b-;r^;zd ftv*€ 2o q^qaL
'al+rrr\U"+Balc
lfn' \r*ac.wE?
+tl % IPr,^ot ol ':F8 1""fl
npdry"ql
',1P @I rtov'@Y
ftpS
)t 'wa+ a-,tab6
'wtf tloL'rwad + :hy? +o;
fr.?
s=rnvr*$1 .fi:fn 4fiwo7
?ttt.(
r,+wJ?L.
Fry
'7vr^u4/aa4+
rl
yoyfirrvP Vaon I t*qva
.rlo ry tnr7'u:-'
"gdq
abr-rr11 ry
o
m^tr..Jf|,fr
heqn-.
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
January26, 1998
o
€,**ve.rt fu
4@$ oa,ta,
t
A.u,
IohJ:6-o
A request for a variance from Section 12-78-12 (building height) of the Town of
Vail Municipal code, to allow for an increase in the 60o/o/40yo building height ratio
for the Gasthof Gramshammer, located at 231 E. Gore Creek Dr./part of Lot A.
Block 58, VailVillase 1st Filins. AppROVED By THE
Applicant: PepiGramshammer, represented$R[fitt€FddftllPlanner: George Ruther FllrtNdlilG ,AND
DESCRIPTION OF THE REOUEST lxrE: tf zt/qP
The applicant. Pepi Gramshammer. represent?Ul{f,lgFEeqedadof pierce. seoerbero,&Associates,isrequestingavariancefromSic{ioi-iF7E.@
faciliiate the construction of a hotel addition at the Gashtof Gramshammer, located at 231
E. Gore Creek Drive. The Gasthof Gramshammer property is located in the Commercial
Core I Zone District.
Pursuant lo Sesiion 12-78-12 of the Municipal Code,
"Height shall be as regulated in the Vail Mllage Urban Design Guide Plan and
Design Considerations."
According to Vail village Urban Design Guide Plan and Design considerations, in part,
/19+tar:.55*g i= "Building height restrictions in Commercial Core I shall be as foltows:
Up to 60% of the building (building coverage area) may be built to a height
of 33 feet or less.
No more than 40olo of the building (building coverage area) may be higher
than 33 feet, but not higherthan 43 feet.
The above heights are based on an assumed 3 feet in 12 feet or 4 feet in
12teet roof pitches. To accommodate and enoourage steeper roof
pitches (up to 6 feet in 12 feei), slight, proportionate height increases
could be granted so long as the height of the building side walls is not
increased.
As stated above, 40% of the roof area building height is limited to a height between 33
feet and 43 feet, and 60% is limited to a maximum of 33 feet in height. The applicant is
rcquesting a variance ol 13.29o/o to allow 53.2goh of the roof area to be between 33
fEet and 4:l feet and 16.710/o of the roof area to be up to 33 feet in height. No portion
of the proposed roof area will exceed 43 feet in height.
h*m*',,p*7
is \' Ft.+,, Fl.
:fol[t ''Pa$dicA 2.
Oira.s,at\ |
6oql{. '5ewee ' 3.
'4.r,1'liH"--.
I
According to lhe applicant, the primary reason for requesting the building height variance
is to allow for an increase in interior ceiling heights and floor depths in order to
accommodate a "higher quality'' hotel guest room design. An increase from an I foot to a
9 foot ceiling height would provide the hotel guest the type of guest experience expected
in a world-class destination resort like Vail. The requested increase would allow for
additional structural floor depths permitting better mechanical/electrical services and
improved soundproofing between guest rooms.
BACKGROUND
Gramshammer submitted an application for a major exterior
hbJ$uEtlivision to the Gasthof Gramshammer property. Upon
6f tlle proposal, it was delermined by staff that the removal of the
exis[fl$; Jerga|, igon-conf0rm i n g, unstructured (surface), off-street patki ng area and
H/_r1:psJbsequent goqctructiono&efttftured off-street parking area constituted a change in"'''*'Iahd use,?nd thdrefore, the pldpEtty musl be brought into compliance with the
development regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code.
4'?997, ttrePlannffid Environmentat Commission uphetd ( 6'l Bishop
,--1frRfffir##€Pgg::t€f#r#{nmfative decision resardins the applicant's proposal,
'A private and public unstrugtured (surface) off-street vehicle parking is a
different land use than private and public atructured (underground/enclosed) off-
street vehicle parking."
and therefore, the property must be brought into compliance with the development
regulations prescribed in the Municipal Code, or a change of non-conforming use must
be approved by the Vail Town Gouncil.
On May 6, 1997, the Vail Town Council approved (5-1 Johnston opposed) a requesi for a
change of non-conforming use, thus allowing for the construction of an underground
Parking structure, wilh one condition. The Council's condition resiricts the on-site vehicle
parking to no more than twenty (20) vehicles.
On May 12, 1997, the Planning and Environmenlal Commission held a worksession
meeting with the applicant lo discuss the proposed hotel addition. The PEC was in
general agreement with the plans submitted by the applicant. The PEC indicated that the
increased density proposed by the applicant seemed reasonable, that the excess site
coverage had to be reduced to the maximum allowed by the Municipal Code, that the
apPlicant had to conform with the maximum height limitations, and that construstion was
prohibited in the Gore creek floodplain and the 50' stream setback. The pEC further
indicated that the proposed minor subdivision relocating lhe common property line
between the Gasthof Gramshammer and the Creekside Building was acceptable.
on August 25, 1997, the Planning and Environmental commission approved a hotel
addition to the Gasthof Gramshammer. The hotel addition was approved on the existing
surface parking area located between the Gasthof Gramshammer and the creekside
Condomjnium Building. The approval included an underground parking structure for up to
twenty (20) vehicles, 625 square feel of expanded retail space, 1,940 square feet of
spe/exercise facility space, eight accommodation units (3,263 sq.ft.) and one
condominium with an attached lock-off unit (1,652 sq.ft.). The total density approved for
the project is five dwelling units, and 5,787 square feet of sommon erea.
III. COMPLIANCE WITH THE VAIL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Vail Village Master Plan
The Vail Village Master Plan has been adopted as an element of the Vail Comprehensive Plan.
The Vail Mllage Master Plan is intended to guide ihe 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. Most importantly, the Vail Village
Master Plan shall serve as a guide to the staff, review boards, and Town Council in ana[zing
fulure proposals for development in Vail Village and in legislating effective ordinances io deal
with such development. For the citizens and guests of Vail, the Master Plan provides a clearly
stated set of goals and objectives outlining how the Village will grow in the future. Upon review
of the Vail Village Master Plan, the siaff believes the following goals, objectives and policies are
relevant to the applicant's request:
Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while prcserving the unique
architec{ural scale of the Mllage in order to sustain its sense of
community and identity.
1.1 Objec{ive: lmplement a consistent Developmenl Review Process to
reinforce the character of the Village.
1.1.1 Polior: Development and improvement pmjects approved in
the Village shall be consistenl with the goals,
objeclives, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
1.2 Obiective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopmeni of residential
and commercial facilities.
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.
2.3 Objective: Increese the number of residential units available for short-
term, ovemight accommodations.
2.3.1 Policy: The development of shori-term accommodation
units is strcngly encouraged. Residential units that
are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed in a manner
that makes them available for short-lerm ovemighi
rental.
Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities to
better serve the needs of our guests.
2.5 Objective:
IV. ZONING ANALYSIS
The following analysis summarizes the relevant zoning statistica for this request:
Legal: 231 East Gore Greek Drive/Part of Lot A, Block 5-8, Vail Village
First Filing.Zoning: Commercial Core | (CCl)
Lot Area: 0.2244 acrel 9,774.8 square feet
Buifdable Area: 0.1642 acrel 7,152.3 square feet
Development August 25, 1992 January 26, 1998Standards: Aoproval Prooosal
GRFA: 5,722 sq.ft., or 80o/o No Change
(includes 787 sq.ft.
of common area)
CommonArea: 5,000 sq.ft., or 87o/o No Change
of allowable GRFA
# of Units 5 DU's (1 DU & 8 AU's) No Change
Site Coverage: 5,719 sq.ft., or 80o/o No Change
Landscaping: no nel reduction No Change
in existing landscaping
Parking/Loading: eleven parking spaces No Change
& one loading berth
Building Height 40% = 33' - 43' 53.29o/o = 33, - 43'
60% = 33' or less 46.71oh = 33' or less
(42.5 feet max.) (42.83 feet max.)
V. BUILDING HEIGHT VARIANCE CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Section 12-17-6, Variance Criteria and Findings, of the Town of Vail
Municipal Code, the Community Development Department recommends approval of the
requested building height variance. The recommendation for approval is based on the
following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or
potential uses and strustures in the vicinity.
Staff believes the requested varience will have minimal, if any, negative
impacts on other existing or potential uses and struelur€s in the vicinity of
I
2.
the Gasthof Gramshammer. The maximum height of ihe addition has not
been increased. The maximum height continues to be approximately 42-
U2ieel. The additional 4 to 5 feet of building height has been added to
lhe areas of the roof lhat were previously limited to 33 feet maximum. The
areas of increased building height are concentrated on the northwest and
northeast comers of the addition. While the increase in building height in
these areas has also increased building mass, staff believes ihe architect
has created a design wtrich contiues to be sensitive to adjoining
properties. Staff further believes that the increase in the area of the roof
over 33 feet in height, but less than 43 feet in height, will have no negative
impact on the pedestrian areas adjacent to the Gasthof Gramshammer.
The location and orientation of the addition ensures that the additional
building height does not impact the pedestrian scale of the area, nor result
in increased shading of the pedestrian mall. The hotel addition conlinues
to comply with the Town's adopted view conidor limitations.
The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified rcgulation 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 specaal privilege.
The Gasthof Gramshammer property is unique in many ways. The hotel
was built in the center of the Village prior to the adoption of zoning in Vail
(1973) and the formulation and adoption of the Vail Village Master Plan
(1990). As such, the existing lodge is non-conforming in relation to
building height. The existing non-conformity results in a practical ditriculty
when attempting to match floor levels and structural elements of the new
addition to the existing building.
Staff believes that the granting of the requested variance will not result in
a grant of special privilege. We believe that the following circumstances
and conditions impact the applicant's ability to construct an addition that
complies with the building height regulations:
1 . . On May 6, 1997, the Town Council appioved and encouraged the
applicant to accommodate on-site parking for the hotel guests.
Although the recommendations of the Vail Village Mester Plan
discourages on-site parking and vehicle intrusion into the Village,
the Council's direclion allowed the applicant to continue parking
vehicles on ihe property. The applicant has proposed an enclosed
parking garage. The access ramp leading down inio the structure
is at its maximum slope (12%) and the interior parking area is at
the maximum cross-slope (5%). To further lower the building
would result in excessive slopes in the parking area.
2. In developing construction drawings for the hotel addition, the
applicant's representatives discovered a Town of Vail storm sewer
undemealh the construction site. The storm sewer cannot be
relocated or lowered. The elevation of the outfall at Gore Creek
dictales the depth of ihe line and prevents the applicant from
simply increasing the depth of the pipe.
3. The existing lodge building creates fixed floor elevations to which
lhe new addition must reasonably relate.
Staff has worked with the applicant's r€presenlative in the redesign of the
building height. We believe the applicant is requesting the minimum
amount of deviation from the 600/o1400/o building height ratio to achieve the
goals of the prqect and the intent of the Municipal Code.
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
The proposed variances will have little, if any, effect on these factors.
B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findinos
before orantino 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.
2. That the granting of ihe variance will not be detrimenlal to the public
health, safety or welfare, or malerially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is wananled for one or more of the following neasons:
a. The strict and literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unneoessary
physical hardship inconsistent wilh the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable io the same site of the variance that do noi apply
generally to olher properlies in the same zone.
c. The strict interpretation or enforcemeni of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of
other properties in the same dislrict.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Community Development Depertment recommends approval of the applicant's
request for a building height variance to allow for an increase in the 60%/400/o building
height ratio. The recommendation for approval is based upon lhe siaffs review of the
variance criteria and findings outlined in Section V of this memorandum. The staff
believes that the building height variance should be granted for the following reasons:
1. The requested variance is not a grant of special privilege as there are numerous
circumstances and conditions which impact the applicant's ability to conslruct the
hotel addition within the prescribed building height regulations.
,l
2. An approval of the requested variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety, or welfare, or will it be materially injurious to the other properties and
improvements in the vicinity.
3. The strict and literal interpretation of the building height regulation will result in a
practical difficulty and unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of the Zoning Code.
3. ' There are exceptions and extraordinary conditions applicable to the applicant's
site that do not apply generally to other properties in the Commercial Core I Zone
District.
l
Page L
Master Plan Guidelines
Goal #1.
Enaurage high quality redeaelopment urhile presenting tlu unique architectural
scale of tlu oillage in order to sustain iE sen* of community and identity..
1.2 Objectioe
Encourage the upgrading and redeaelopment of residential and commercial
facilities.
This applicant is requesting a variance to the height of the project as it relates to
the proportion of height percentages. The percentage increase in height between
33'4" and 43'4" will be approximately 12%. No portion of the building will
exceed the maximum of 43'-0" in any'area. The primary height adjustment is
requested at the hotel portion of the building on the north part of the parcel.
Specifically, we are asking for an increase in ceiling heights and floor depths in
order to accommodate a "higher"quality" hotel guest room design standard. An
increase from an 8'-0" to 9'-0" ceiling height would provide a better hotel guest
room experience which is expected in a "world class" destination resort such as
Vail. The requested increase in structural depths from 1'-0" to 7'-6" is also
necessary for accommodating primary and secondary structural elements but
better mechanical/electrical and acoustical environments in individual rooms.
Air quahty and acoustical isolation have become extremely important
requirements for today's hotels. In order to achieve these goals, additional
depths are necessary.
The increased height would have minimal massing impact on the street and
pedestrian activities around the Childrenjs Fountain. There are no impacts to any
view corridor. The heights along the southern elevation impacting the Children's
Fountain space would be unchanged. The screening of service facilities from the
pedestrian view will continue to be of major importance to the applicant.
F:\PRJ\gramshamner\doc\Master Plan Guidelines.doc
|r
I
Page 2
Goal #2
To foster a strong touist inilustry and promote year-rounil emnomic health nnil
aiability for tlu aillage nnd for thc community as a u,lnle.
' 2.5 Objectiae
Enuurage tlu mntinued upgrading, ren(nntion, and maintenance of existing
lodging and commercial facilities to betbr sente the needs of our guests.
The applicant is requesting an increase of 7':0" to the spa and exercise level. A
9'-0" ceiling would greatly improve the quality of these amenity facilities.
F:\PRJ\ granshdnsrcr\da\Maeter Pl,an Guiddine*doc
Page 3
Goal #5
lncrease and improue the capacity, effciency, and aesthetics of the transportation and
circalation system throughout the aillage.
Objectiue
5.1.5 Meet parking demands zuith publ'c and. pioate parking facilities.
As currently designed, the below grade parking facility *&sip€d functions
adequate$ for the guest and services at the hotel. Lowering grades any further
would greatly, if not totally, impede the functionality of this space. Also, the
length and grade of the driveway ramp is governed by both property lines and
Town of Vail maximum grading requiremenb. The parking ramp will be heated
to maintain good access to the facility.
F:\PRf \ gramshamner\ doc\ Master Plan Guidelines.doc
/
o
Page 4
Hardship Issues as they relate to Variance
Building can not be feasibly lowered into the ground to gain additional height.
1. lowering garage would create excessive ramp grade to parking entrance. .' 2. Ramped parking is not corsidered good quality parking in excess of.S%.
3. Water table issues of lowering parking garage become a conceflr.
4. Town of Vail storm drainage main was discovered rurning through
parking structure. Inverts can not be changed due to Gore Creek
elevation. Elevation of piping must be accommodated in garage. This
condition has negatively impacted the parking Earage.5, Existing building creates many fixed elevation conditioru. Floor levels
need to relate to one another between new and existing construction.
F:\PR!\ grasElEmms\da\Master Plan Guidelinesdoc
\.\:=
-.--\--,I---..'t
T:)e
'' t-*f*i
o ,'/'-'\
-t
6
j\.-7
--_-_->.
*tx
F
FIF
q
t!r.l
\
\
lt', ', \it a{
GASTTIOf GNil$TAMilGR ADDMOiI # fi4 frrilli
o rlLE soPY
TPPn0TGDFEB g Egg
1. A request for a building height variance from Section 12-78-12, to ellow for an increase in
the 60/40% building height ratio for the casthof Gramshammer, located at 231 E. Gore
Creek Dr./Part of Block 58, Vail Village 1st.
Applicant: Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt SegerbergPlanner: George Ruther
George Ruther gave an overview of the staff memo.
Greg Moffet aEked if the applicant had anything to add.
Kurt Segerberg, representing Pepi Gramshammer, explained the model and showed how it laid
oul between the two buildings. He explained that the sport shop, lobby areas and entry had lo
relate to the existing lodge and that the stair tower was taken out to get below the 43' height
elevation. He said they discovered that the original ceiling heights were not adequate. He said
that they were asking for about 1/z feet of structural depths, as this would be steel consiruction
which would aid in the speed of completion of the project. He said they needed more room to
make the acoustics work. Kurt stated that the parking garage controlled this project and that they
were using lhe 120/o maximum grade down to the garage. He said they discovered an existing
storm sewer down the cenler of the garage, which was a surprise, but that they were
accommodating it in the project.
Jim Mele, the Contractor for the project, confirmed what Kurt said regarding the quality of the
project. He said the imposition of today's standards put a burden on ihe property owner.
Greg Moffet asked for any public comment.
Jim Lamont, representing the East Village Homeowne/s Association (EVHA), said staff created a
series of conditions explaining ihat this was not a grant of special privilege. Jim said he had
been approached by many people who wanted a 9' head-height and he wanted staff and Council
to change the Zoning Code to allow the incremental heighi limitation to apply in this zone district.
He said if that was done, the Town would get more peaked roofs.
Planning and Environmental Commieuon
Minutes
January 26, 199E
Galen Aasland said the 9' ceiling was reasonable and the storm sewer hardship through the
garage was reasonable. He asked Kurt why a structure wiih steel planks was not chosen.
Kurl Segerberg said he looked at a number of different lypes of systems and explained that the
steel frame exlended from the garage all the way up. He said it worked out well to use just one
subcontractor. He said they siayed away from pre.cast becauEe of the cost and scheduling
problems.
Jim Viele explained that pre-cast doesn't lend itself to cutting through.
Galen Aasland asked how the height was being affected by the dwelling unit in the center of the
building.
George Ruther said there would be very little change in the percentage ratio.
Ann Bishop had no comments.
Diane Golden asked what the ceiling height of the dwelling unit was.
George Ruther said the ridgeline was a maximum 43' high.
Kurl Segerberg said there would be no height increase inside the dwelling unit.
John Schofield agreed thal a 9' ceiling was necessary and the sewer through the garage was a
practical difficulty.
Greg Amsden had no comments.
Greg Moffet said lhe storm drain was ihe reason for lhe variance.
Mike Mollica said Galen brought out a good point, that if they just needed 9' ceilings, they could
bring the height down.
Pepi Gramshammer, the owner, said this hotel was built in 1964 when 8' ceilings were ok. He
said there were different rules for different people in this Town, as there were buildings with 4
stories. He said he had 3 % stories and that every building on the back side of his hotel was
taller. He said that the Vail Village Master Plan encouraged more high quality Village lodging.
Jim Lamont said the structural technique was beyond the purview of the planner and he didn't
see where Mike could say this was new information.
Kurt Segerberg said he had a memo regarding the Austria Haus and there was no problem with
the variance.
Ann Bishop made a motion for approval, in accordance with the staff memo, with the change that
there be more specific language added stating there was an eesement through the project.
John Schofield said he would second the molion, if Ann would remove the change to the motion
regarding the easement language.
Ann Bishop said she would remove the request for a change to the molion.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
Januarv 26. 1998
5.,'''
The motion passed by a vote of 6-0.
Greg Mofret requested approval of the minutes, as Galen Aasland was recusing from thc ncxt
item and leaving.
Planning aod Bnvimmcntlt Cmnirsiotr
Minutos
Ienurry 26 1998
lo
Design Review Action Form
TOWN OFVAIL
Project Name: Gasthof Gramshammer Hotel Addition
Project Description: Request to construct a new hotel addition to the west side of the Gasthof
Gramshammer
Owner, Address and Phone: Pepi Gramshammer
Architect/Contact, Address and Phone: Kurt Segerberg, Pierce, Segerberg& Assoc. Architects, 1000
South Frontage Road West, Vail, Colorado 81658
Proiect Street Address: 231 East Gore Creek Drive
Legal Description:
Parcel Number:
Comments:
Lot A, Block 5-8, Vail Village First X'iling
Buildine Name: Gasthof Gramshammer
-7""+\.,-t6oardL$taff ActionL-*.--'-
Motion by: Bishop Action: Approved
Seconded by: Pierce
Vote: 4-0
Conditions: Approved per plans and renderings dated November 19,1997.
Town Planner: George Ruther
Date: 1l/20197
F:\EVERYONE\DRB\APPROVAL\9nGASTHoF.N20
DRB Fee Pre-Paid:$0
December 15,1997
Mr. George Ruther
Town Planner
75 South Frontage Road West
Vail, CO 81557
Pierce, Segerbert & A.sociates
Archirecrs, PC,,A.l.A.
Main Of{ice
1000 S. Frontage Road VV
Vail. CO 81557
fox: 970 476 4608
phohe: 970 476 4433
Denver Of{ice
l6l7 Wazee Street
uenven !(J 6ulul
fox: )Q3 623 276?
Phorei 303 623 3355Dear George,
We would like a height variation of 4'-0" to that portion of the Gramshammer
Lodge addition which houses the newly proposed rooms. The purpose of this
request is to add approximately 1,'-0" of interior height to the hotel rooms,
increasing their floor to ceiling dimension from 8'-0" to 9'-0". This increase
would be on three levels only. We have also found that in Design Development
we need 1'-6" floor depths for the third and fourth floors. The request for this
vatiance stems from the fact that "quality rooms" as those being proposed in the
new lodge need a minimum of 9'-0" ceiling height.
Because of where this portion of the building locates itself on the property the
impacts to surrounding buildings r,,vill not be impacted. Currently, the existing
lodge exceeds the height of this addition by one full story.
Best regards,
KAS/jod
BERG & ASSOCIATES, ARCHITECTS, P.C.
updeted 4/17195 Application Da&
PECMEETINGDA
APPLICATION F'OR A VARIANCE
GENERALINFORMATION
This proccdrc is rcquircd for any projcct rcqucsting a variancc. Thc ap'plication will not bo acccprcd until all thc
inforuntiou ie zubmittcd
A. BRErFDEscRrprroNoFpR o**n, kfl&ff Vr4P/*ge F
-,,f t t'r'o
B. NAME OF APPLICANT (ty?e orprint)
*r*u, O n J &sr(hu ct*n *noxB_47c:_€6LQ
CITY, STATE,Aq
C. NAME OF APPLICANT'S REPRESENTA LP1|' s6i@,
Gfrt<SA*nrAq-
ADDRESS
/@o 5. ftblloa,€rtry. u'-
CITY, STATE, AP VHu 44.
D. NAI4E oF owNER(s) (typ" or pnn)-**f76 fr 'B' ,43owa
owNER(S) STGNATURE(S
ADDRESS PHONE-
--_-:-
CITY, STATE, ZIP
E. LOCATIONOFPROPOSAL:
LOT-----------BLOC(-p1 ;pq6
STREET ADDRESS 441 6. QoSoa c@- AL"
crrY, srArE, ,n VA/' , oo' ,.
U.. EEE
$250.00 PAID_CK#-BY
The fec rog! bc paid bcforc thc Community Devclopmcot Dcpartrnccrt will acccpt yor prqosal.
M. ADIACENT PROPERry NOTIFICATION
Staryod, adfusscd cnvclopcs of lhe namcs of owncrs of all propcrty a{accnt to thc subject Propcrty
INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHIND AND ACROSS STREETS, a.rd a ligl of their n sca and mailing addresses.
TIIE APPUCANT WILL BE RESPONSDLE FOR CORRECT IvIAILING ADDRESSES.
IV. PRE.APPLICATION CONFERENCE
A pre-applicatiou confsrcoce vrith a planning staf mcmbo is sEongly rccommca&d o &tcnnino if ary additimd
information is nccdcd" No application will bc acccpJcd udcss it is corylctc (must includo all itcms reo3icd
by thc zoning adrninistralor). It is thc applicant's rcsponsibility to make an appointmcnt u.ith tht cefrro lind
our aircut xiditional zubmital rcquiremcnts.
V. SUBMITTAI,INFORMATION
PIJASE NoTE TI{AT A qotr&I&IE APPLICATION WILL STREAI\4LD{E TIIE APPROVAL PRocEss
FOR YOIJRPROJECT BYDECRBASING THENT'MBER OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TIIAT TIIE
PLAI.INING AlilD ET.MROI.IMENTAL COMMISSION (PEC) IvIAY STIPI LA'IE. AIJ.JONDffiONS OF
APPROVAL MUST BE COMPILED WTIII BEFORE A BI,'ILDING PERMT TS ISSUSO.
o
=AAcorelt, A.
ot{ ft/6- B.
4r fltE
".
FOUR (4) COPES OF TIIE FOLIOWING MUST BE SIJBMITTED:
A writlco satcmcot ofthc gwieo nmrc ofthc varimcc rcqucrrod ard thc rcgulciqr involovcd Thc $atcmcnt
must also addrcss: r
l. Thc rclationrhip ofthc rcqucstcd vuiancc to oth. cr cxicing or potcntid uscs and EEusturcs in thc
vicidty.
2. Thc dcgcc to which rclicf ftrom thc s&ict or limal intcrpctation and cnfqccmcnt of a spccifcd
regulatim ia ncccssary to rhiovc conpatibility and uniformity of trcatrncnt among sitcs in thc vicinity
or to atain thc objectivcs ofthis title wirhorr graot or epocial privilcge.
3. Thc cf€ct of thc vrimoc on light and air, distibutior o(populatioo, transportatioq Uaffic
facilitics, utilitics, and public safcty
4. How pur rcqrrcs corylics rrith Vail'e Corryrchc'nsivc Plan.
A topognphic andor improvcmcnt sunrcy at a scalo ofat lcast l" = 2O etampcd by a Colorado lictnscd
survcyor including locations of dl cxisting impmvcmarts, including gndcs and clcnations. Othcr clcmcnts
which must bc ghown rro parking and loading reas, ingrcss and cgrcsg landscapcd rcas and utility rd
drainagc fcaturc.
A Bit! plao at a scalc of at lcast I " = 20' showing aisting 8nd PrcPostd buildin$.
D. All peliminary building ctorations and floor plans $rfEciort to indicatc thc dincnrions' ggnaal appcarancc'
ecale and uee of all buitdings urd apaccs exi*ing and proposed on the site.
64 F/ L € ' p. A plclininary titlc rcport to rcri$ owncrship and oescmcnts.
vt
ut
F.
G.
A.
B.
If the proposal ie locAcd in a multi-family dcvetopmcnt which has a homoowncrs' associatiolt, then wrjttcn
approval fiom tbc association in support of thc pmjcct must bc rcccived by a drly authorizcd agcnt fc eaid
association.
Any additional maarial ngrcssary for the review ofthe application as detcrrrined by thc zoning a'lminict'ator.
For interior modificaions, an improvement sunrry and site plan may bc waived by the ^*t *T*Yat.
TIME REOITIRETvIENTS
Thc Planning and. Envkonnrental Commission mccts on thc 2nd and 4th Mondalys of cach month. A co-lrplcto
application ica and all accompanying matcrial (as dcscribcd abovc) mtst bc submitcd a minimum of four
(4) wceks prior to rhc date of rhc PEC public hearing. No incomplct€ applications (as dctcrmincd by thc
zoning administrarc) wiU be acccpted by the planning staffbeforc or aftcr thc dcsigned stbmittal da!e.
All PEC approvcd variurccc shatl lapsc if cons8ustion is not mmmcnccd within two y,crs of thc datc of
approval and diligcntly pursrcd to corplction.
OTIIER
Ifthis application rcquitls a scparata rcvicw by any Lod Starc or Fcdcral agcocy oth6 than thc Tovm ofVail
tnc a'ppiLriou fco sbafi bc incr€ascd by $200.00. E:rarrplee of arch rwiaw, may includc, but aro not limitcd
to: Colorado Depannrcnt of Higbway Acccss Pcrmits, Army Corps of Engineers 4{X' erc'
Tbc ryplicot shall bc rcsponsrtlc for paying any publirhi4g focs which alt in cxccss of 509/o of thc rpplication
fcc. E, at tno applicant's icqucsg any'miaci is postponod for hcaring, causing tho matcr to bc ra-Publisha4
thco, thc cntire fce for srch re-publication shall bc paid by tto applicant
Applications dccmed by the Commmity Dcvclopmcnt Dcpartncnt to b8vc sipificant dcsign, lglrd uso ot otha
iasrcc which may havc a siggificant impact on tbc comrnunity may rcquirc revicw by consultan$ othcr thar
tovrn staff. Should a dctcrminatioo bc made by Oc town stalfthat ao outsidc consrltant is nccdcd to rcvicw any
oPpiisuiion, Commrmiiy Deveiopmcnr may hire at ornsidc conillEr! it sndl cstrmatc tho amount of moncy
lcccs3ary to pay hi31 or bcr and-this ernount shall bc frrwardcd to thc Town by thc op,plicant at thc timc hc files
his rypltation with thc Community Dcvclopmt Dcparurcnt. Upm corylctio ofthc_rwicw ofthc
applicanion by thc co|nsultat any of thc funds forwrd.d by tho aplicaat for paymnt ofthl coosultant which
Gve not Uccn paid to tho constttsDt rhall bo rctumcd io tho applicmr ExPcnscs incurred by the Town in
orccss oftho amou forwardcd by thc applicant shall bc paid to the Town by thc applicant within 30 days of
notification by tbo Town.
c.
f:\wcryone\fotmsVrriance.4 I ?
Dec.-L8-e7 I2:3sP PSA
UHITECTS
FRIsco e7T5a2sr5 P -O?
t
/"'>-(nl'ol( #E=L -
W"-l la "
Dec-Is-s7 12:ssP PSA
ftttt.Ts
FRIsco e7u6a2s16 P-O3
u
I
$
A.l
$
$
q
..4trzae es
loz'-o
o
-td
0
+lo
I
$1
sl
$l
ffil
H;
\.1lnl
iNG
=lrl
il
o1l
rl
BI
ILD
A ?7?i+- -or;l
o
,o
-"FE|.FF<EE
@q'-;ilt
-5ra
'--'-*iEn**V
SECTION
Pierce, Segerberg paeh Architects P.
o
&S
o
C.A.I. A.
Gasthof Gramshamner AdditionPart of Lot A, Block 5-B, vaiL villageFirst Filing, Eagle County, Colorado
Legal Description
1) Part of Lot A, and E-I , Block 5-B
*2) Part of Lot Arr Block 5-B
*3) Part of Lot A, Block 5-B
4) Lot B, Block 5-B
*6) Part Lot K, Block 5-E
*7) Part of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
*8) Part of Lot K and L, Block 5-E
ovrner and Address
Gasthof Inc.
231 E. Gore Creek
VaiI, Colorado 81657
C.H. Rosenquist and
P.S. Switzer
2Y" E. Gore Creek
Vai1, Colorado 81657
Sitzmark fnc.
183 E. Gore Creek
Vail, Colorado 81657
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road W
Vail, Colorado 8L657
Hillis of Snowmass Inc.
17o East Gore Creek DriveVail, Colorado 81657
Vail Associates rnc.
P.O. Box 7
Vail, Colorado 81-658
village Center Assoc.
125 W. WiIIos, Bridge Road
Vail, colorado 81657
sonn"?lp Properties, Inc.
20 vail RoadVail, colorado ai-657
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road w
Vai1, Colorado aL657
9) Tract I, Block 5-E
*indicates stamped envelopes enclosed
Main Off ice: 1000 South Frontage Road West . Vail, Colorado 8I657 . tO3l476-4433
One Tabor Center . 1200 Seventeenth Street. Suite 515 . Denver, Colorado 80202 . 3O31623-3355
a .^*
11,,1,,,'ll'll,,,l,l,l,,,l,,ll'l
Sonnenalp Properties, Inc.
20 Vail Road
Vail. CO 81657
Hillis of Snowmass, Inc.
170 E Gore Creek Drive
Vail, CO 81657
Vail Associates
PO Box 7
Vail, CO 81658
ll,'l,''rll,ll,,,l,l,l,,,l,,ll,l
Village center Association
125 West Willow Bridge Road
Vail, CO 81657
Qucstions?fl rhc Planning Suff at ,{79-Lll8
A PPI.I C,\Tl ON I"OR PLA NNINC A ND IiNvl RONi\l I']N]'AI.
COMMISSION N PPROVAL
CENERAL INFORMATION
1'his applicatiort is for any projcct rcquiring approval by thc Planning and Environmcntal Commission. For spccific
infomtation, scc thc subnrittal rcquircnrcnts for thc particular approval that is rcqucstcd. Thc application can not bc
acccptcd until all rcquircd information is subnrittcd. Thc projcct ntay also nccd to bc rcvicwcd by thc Torvn Council
and/or thc Dcsign Rcvicw Board.
IFPROVED BYTHE
TYPE OF APPLICATION:
tr Additional CRFA (250)
E Bcd and Brcakfast
tr Conditional Usc Pcrmittr Major or E Minor Subdivision
tr Rczoning
tr Sirn VarianccI vii.n..
tr Zoning Code Anrcndmcnt
TOWN OF VAIL
tcration
to an SDD
D.DESCRIPTIONOFTHEREQUEST: 1. Request to accommodate 5 D.U.ts on the orooosed
TcIvN OF VAIL
a1ffi[oved Dcvclopnrcnt Plan
ail Village)
project. 2. Request to cantilever a b
line.
SYtf{l$o-year f lood plaln
(_'.
D,
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LOT-A-BLOCK 5-B 6 First
ADDRESS: 231 East Gore Creek DrivpfiJfl f Gramshannner
ZoNING: commerciar core I Distriot}*"ER.
JA.(1.
NAME OF OWNER(S): Gasthof Gramshamrner, Inc.
MAILINGADDRESS: 231 East co." Ct
G.
Vail ,.CO 81657 PHONE: 476-5626
F. OIVNER(S) SIGNATURE(S)r
NAME OF REPRESENTATIVE:Pierce, Segerberg & Associates
MAILING ADDRESS:Vail, C0 81657
1000 South Frontase Road West /f 300
pHONE: 476-4433
H. FEE - SEE THE SUBMIT-TAL REQUIREMENTS FOR THE APPROPRIATE FEE.
STJBMIT THIS APPLICATION, ALL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND THE FEE TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF COIIIMTJNITY DBVELOPMENT, 75 SOUTH FRONTAGE ROAD,
For Officc Use Only:
.FecPatd:250"d) CW: l01tt ny:7w
Rcvi*d &96
VAIL, COLORADO 81657.
,\
7^4n997
TI{E NATURE OF VARIANCE REOUESTED
We request the increase of allowed 4 d.u.'s to 5 d.u.'s for the proposed project in order for it to be
more feasible and provide additional bed base for Vail Village's tourism needs.
We also interpret the 1O0-year flood plain line to be a horizontal limitation and our project will be
cantilevering a maximum of l0 ft. over it at one location.
EFFECTS ON COMPRETIENSryE PLAN. REGULANONS AND ADJACENT PROPERTIES
rThe extra dwelling units will positively contribute to Vail Village's tourist accommodation
capacity, bed base and resulting economical potential.
rThe cantilever over the 100-year flood plain has no effect on the flood line at the level at which it
occurs. Therefore it causes no health and safety problems and no hardship to adjacent property owners.
rThe variance, if granted, will cause no public safety concerns; will add to tourist numbers in
Town and will not require additional traffic facilities and utilities by the Town. The variance has no eflect
on light and air issues.
.The pupose and use of the proposed structure complies with Vail's Comprehensive Plan and is
located on Commercial Core I District.
,}
I
ll',1',"ll,ll',,1,1,1,,,1,,11,1
Sitzmark, Inc.
183 East Gore Creek
Vall, CO 81657
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage road West
Vail, CO 81657
Ch Rosenquist and
IrS Switzer
231 East Gore Creek
Vail, Co 81657
Applicant:
Planner:
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUF PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOIICE
NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town ol
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 18.66.060 of the Municipal Code ol the
Town of Vail on-January 12,1998, at 2:00 p.M. in the Town of vaitMunicipal Buitding. In
consideration of:
A request for a height variance, to allow for an additonal 1'0 of interior height to be added to the
hotel rooms on three levels only (Gasthof Gramshammer) located at 231 E. Gore Creek Dr.iPart
of Block 58, Vail Village 1st.
Pepi Gramshammer, represented by Kurt Segerberg
George Ruther
A request for a density variance, to allow for the construction of a two-bedroom unit, located at
227 Wall StreeVLot B & C, Block 5C, Vait Viilage 1st Fiting.
Applicant: ASI Vail Land Holding, L.L.C., c/o Base Mountain Sports - Brett Barnett,
represented by Kathy Langenwalter, ArchitectPlanner: George Ruther
A request for additonal GRFA utilizing the 250 ordinance, to allow for a garage addition with
olfice space above, located at 4532 Streamside Circle/Lot 15, Bighorn 4th Addition
Applicant: Edward Padilla, represented by Kathy Langenwalter, ArchitectPlanner: Reed Onate
A request for a setback variance, to allow for a revised parking lot, located at 4192 Spruce
Way/Lot 5, Block 7, Bighorn 3rd Addition.
Applicant: Altair Vail Inn, c/o Mary Herzig, Represented by Prudential Gore Range
Properties.Planner: Dominic Mauriello
A request for a worksession to discuss a conditional use permit to construct tour multiple{amily
dwelling units and variances lrom Section 18.28.090 (Building Height), Section 1 8.28.140
(Landscape Area) and Section 18.28.070 (Setbacks), to allow for commercial and residential
expansion, located at 143 E. Meadow Drive (Crossroads East Building) / Lot P, Block 5D, Vail
Village 1st.
Applicant: Crossroads Plaza, Trevina L.P., represented by Bill PiercePlanner: Dominic Mauriello
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 Deparlment, 75 South Frontage Road.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notilication. Please call 479-
2114 voice or 479-2356 TDD for information.
Community Development Department
Published December 26, 1997 in the Vail Trail.4fl,l{
FIL T COPY
TOWN OFVAIL
De partment of Community D eve lopme nt
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
HX 970-479-2452
Novembcr 6,1997
Kurt Segerberg
Pierce, Segerberg & Associates Architects, Inc.
1000 South Frontage Road West
Vail, Colorado 81658
Re: Gasthof Gramshammer DRB review
Dear Kurt,
Thank you for appearing bcforc the Town of Vail Design Review Board on Wedncsday,
November 5, with the proposed addition to thc Gasthof Gramshammcr. The Design Rcvicw
Board has apptoved the proposed addition in pdnciple. However, the Board fclt that thcy nccdcd
additional information on the proposal before a final vote could be taken.
Thc Design Review Boald has requestcd that you prepare architectural drawings of thc cxtcrior
elcments of the building. Specifically, thc Board would likc you to prescnt details of the deck
railings, door and window trim, fascia, doors, flower boxes, etc. Thc Board also discussed adding
an arched entry over the cntrance to the loading dock at the Creekside Building and providing
further information on how thc addition ties into the existing front entrancc to the lodgc.
Ifyou have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call. You can fcach me at 479-
2145.
Sincerely,
George Ruther, AICP
Town Planner
{g rrn"urr^r",
tO
Yi il#3 iiq
-TR1A @ ua.
4oua \tataz_ a.. C,pA_5huq6a @ \elitrpaLe
R*'rc b*ro @ frae lde oJ h;yl'hoJ q+ k@lN^ ek .2$nsED d#Lr{E0,*J Y" -*'e @- q-cF ey_ (...r,+tueg"rf\*\ vbcD =35 fiea.,u6 @il_ eJhd' (tttt'a \
| '<4'rr **/ '
AllLd B. 4o?a,ue-o % :,.tbm,ll- ilov.18, tqqlB tt p Nar g,, raer
DATE RECEIVED BY
COMMUN ITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
[0V - 00lslv1, DEI DtP i
AMENDED
APPLICATION FOR
MINOR SUBDIVTSION REVIEW
CHAPTER 17.20 VAIL MUNICIPAL CODE
(4 OR FEWER LOTS)
(please print or type)
A.APPLICANT Gasthof Gramshammer, Inc.
231- East Gore Creek Drive
MAfLINGADDRESS vair, cor"rado 816y qHONE}TO/476-5626
B.PROPERTY OWNER See attached Page 1A
OWNER'S SIGNATUR
MAILING ADDRESS See attached Page 1A PHONE
c.LOCATfON OF PROPOSAL(street a&ress\ 223, 222 and 231 East
Gore Creek Drive
attached Page
D.
E.
LOTS "a"BLOCK_S-B suBDlVlsloNVa.il Villaqe Flrst Filing
by Pierce Segerberg
FEE-.$250.00. pAtD a a==s."iare;cHEc(#_ r0764 _ DAIE 2/24/s7
The first step is to request a meeting wittr the zoningmdministrator t,o assisithE-
applicant in meeting the submittal requirements and to give the proposal a preliminary
review.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
1. The applicant shall submit three copies, two of which must be mylars, of the
proposal following the requirements for a final plat below. certain of these
requirements may b9 waived by the zoning administrator ancl/or the Planning
and Environmental commission if determined not applicable to the project.
2. A list of all adjacent property owners (including those behind and across the
street) wlrH COMPLETE ADDRESSES shail atso be submitted. tn addlilon,
submlt addressed, stamped envelopes for each of the above.
3. Title Report verifying ownership and easements. (Schedules A & B)
4- An environmentat impact report may be required as stipulated under chapter
18.56 of the zoning code.
5. FINAL PI.AT - REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURE:
(Some of these requirements may be waived.)
a. The suMivider shall submit four copies of the final plat, two of which
shall be mylars, twelve copies of the final EIR (if required) and any
additional material as required below. Within thirty days of receiving the
complete and conect submittal for a final plat, the zoning administrator
shall cause a copy of a notice of the time, place and general nature of
the hearing and proposal to be published in a newspaper of general
circulation in the Town of vail at least fifteen days prior to said hearing.
Also, adjacent property owners to the proposed subdivision shall be
notified in writing at least seven days prior to the public hearing.
F.
B.
c.
Final Plat - Staff Review.
The linal plat shall be circulated to and reviewed by the town's departmenb,
including, but not limited to Public Works, Transportation, Community
Development, Recreation, Administration, Police and the Fire Department.
Comments and concerns of these departments will be fonrarded to the pEC
prior to the public hearing.
Finat Plat and Supolementarv Material - contents.
The final plat and supplementary material shall contain the following
information:
1. The linal plat shall be drawn in India ink, or other substantial solution, on
a reproducible medium (preferably mylar) with dimension of twenty-four
by thirty-six inches and shall be at a scale of one hundred leet to one
inch or larger with margins of one and one-half to two inches on the left
and one-half inch on all other sides.
:
2. Accurate dimensions to the nearest one-hundredth of a foot for all lines,
angles and curves used to describe boundaries, streets, setbacks,
alleys, easements, structures, areas to be reserved or dedicated for
public or common uses and other important features. All curves shall be
circular arcs and shall be defined by the radius, central angle, arc chord
distances and bearings. All dimensions, both linear and angular, are to
be determined by an accurate control survey in the field which must
balance and close within a limit of one in ten thousand.
3. North arrow and graphic scale.
4. A systematic identification of all existing and proposed bulldings, units,
lots, blocks, and names for all streets.
5. Names of all adjoining subdivisions with dotted tines of abutting tots. tf
adjoining land is unplatted, it shall be shown as such.
6. An identification ol the streets, alleys, parks, and other public areas or
facilities as shown on the plat, and a dedication thereof to the public
use. An identification of the easements as shown on the plat and a
grant thereol to the public use. Areas reserved for future public
acquisition shall also be shown on the plat.
7 - A written survey description of the area including the total acreage to lhe
nearest appropriate significant figure. The acreage of each lot or parcel
shall be shown in this manner, as well.
8. .A description of all survey monuments, both found and set, which mark
the boundaries of the subdivision, and a description of all monuments
used in conducting the survey. Monument perimeter per Colorado
statutes. Two perimeter monuments shall be established as major
control monuments, the materials which shall be determined by the town
engineer.
9. A statement by the land surveyor explaining how bearing base was
determined.
10. A certificate by the registered land surveyor as outlined in chapter 17.32
of this title as to the accuracy of the survey and plat, and trat the survey
was performed by him in accordance with Colorado Bevised Statutes
1973, Title 38, Articte 51.
11. A certificate by an attomey admitted to practice in the state of colorado,
or corporate title insurer, that the owner(s) of record dedicating to the
public the public right-oFway, areas or facilities as shown thereon are
12.
the owners thereof in fee simple, free and clear of atl liens and
encumbrances except as noted. (See example in Chapter 17.32)
The proper form for approval of the plat by the PEC chairman and
acceptance of dedication and easements by the council with signature
by lhe mayor and attestation by the town clerk. Examples are found in
Chapter 17.32 ot this title.
The proper form for filing of the ptat with the Eagte County Clerk and
Becorder as per example in Chapter 17.S2.
Certificate of dedication and ownership as per example in the appendix.
Should the certificate of dedication and ownership provide for a
dedication of land or improvements to the public, all beneficiaries of
deeds of trust and mortgage holders on said real property will be
required to sign the certificate of dedication and ownership in addition to
the fee simple owner thereof.
All curent laxes must be paid prior to the Town's approval of plat. This
includes taxes which have been billed but are not yet due. The
certiticate of taxes paid must be signed on the plat or a statement from
the Eagle County Assessor's Office must be provided with the submittal
information stating that allta<es have been paid.
Additional material which shall accompany the final plat incluiJes, but is
not limited to:
a. Complete and final environmental impact report if required by the
zoning ordinance;
b. Complete engineering plans and specifications for all
improvements to be installed, including but not limited to water
and sewer utilities, streets and related improvements, pedestrian
and bicycle paths, bridges and storm drainage improvements;
c. Maps at the same scale as the linal plat showing existing
topography and proposed grading plan (contour interval
requirements same as preliminary plan), a landscape and or
revegetation plan showing locations, type and sizes ol existing
and proposed vegetation.
d. A map the same scate as the finat plat depicting alt high and
moderate avalanche hazard areas, lorty percent and high slope
areas and one hundred year flood plain areas as defined in the
hazard ordinance ol the Vail Municipal Code;
e. Title insurance company proof of ownership of all lands within
the proposal;
Copies of any monument records required of the land surveyor in
accordance with Colorado Revised Statutes 1973, Title Og,
Article 53;
Any agreements with utility companies when required;
Protective covenanb in form for recording;
Other data, certificates, affidavits, or documents as may be
required by the zoning administrator or PEC or council in the
enforcement of these regulations.
lf this application requires a separate review by any local, State
or Federal agency other than the Town of Vail, the application
fee shall be increased by $200.00. Examples of such review,
13.
14.
15.
16.
s.
h.
l.
may include, but are not limited to: Colorado Departrnent of
Highway Access Permits, Army Corps of Engineers 404, elc.
The applicant shall be responsible for paying any publishing fees
which are in excess of 50% of the application fee. lf, at the
applicant's request, any matter is postponed for hearing, causing
the matter to be re-published, then the entire fee lor such re-
publication shall be paid by the applicant.
Applications deemed by the Community Development
Department to have significant design, land use or other issues
which may have a significant impact on the community may
require review by consultants other than town staff. Should a
determination be made by the town staff that an oubide
consultant is needed to review any applicaiion, the Community
Development Department may hire an outside consultant, it shall
estimate the amount of money necessary to pay him or her and
this amount shall be fonararded to the Town by the applicant at
the time he files his application with the Community Development
Department. Upon completion of the review of the application by
the consultant, any of the funds fonrarded by the applicant for
payment of the consultant which have not been paid to the
consultant shall be returned to ttre applicant. Expenses incurred
by the Town in excess ol the amount fonrvarded by the
application shall be paid to the Town by the applicant within 30
days of notification by lhe Town.
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
SEEING THAT THE APPROVED PLAT IS PROMPTLY RECORDED WITH THE EAGLE
COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER.
4
EXHIBIT A
A part of Lot rra't Bl_ock 5-8, Vail VillageFirst Filing, accordi-ng Eo the map thereofrecorded in t.he offlce of the Eagle CounLy,CoLorado, Clerk and Recorder, more particu-lar1y described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of theCreekside Condominiums, according to the mapthereof recorded April 14, l_97i_ in Book 220aL Page 228, in the office of the EagleCounty, Colorado, Clerk and Recorder, thence,along the North line of said Creekside
Condomi-niums, S7901,7,0Orrw 45.06 f eet to theNorthwesterly line of said I_,oL a, thence thefollowing two courses al-ong the Northwesterly
and Northeasterl-y lines of said Lot a, 1)
N66o18'00rrE 1-07.51 feet; 2) S77oAI'00'rE "12.59
feet; to the Northwesterly corner of Lot b,
Bl-ock 58, Vail Village First. Filing; thence,along the Westerly line of said Lot b,
526o41,/00rrw 2L.O0 feet to the Northwesterlycorner of the Covered Bridge Condominiums,according to the map thereof recorded in Book
666 aL Page 559 in the office of the Eagle
County, Colorado, CLerk and Recorder, thence,along the Westerly 11ne of sai-d CoveredBridge Condominiums, S2604t'OOnW 54.00 feett.o the Southwesterly corner of said CoveredBridge Condominiums; thence, departing saidcorner, N63o19'00rrE 22.00 feet; thence
32604I '00uW 62.36 f eet; thence S00o09'00I'E35-75 feet; thence S89o5l-'00rrw 5.42 teet;thence N00o09'0OnW 15.00 feet; thence
S'l9o 1,7' 00 uW 1,6 .21- f eet to the Southeastcorner of said Creekside Condominiums,-thence, along the East, line of said Creekside
Condominiums, N10o43'00"W 31.00 feet,- thencedeparting said line, N79oL7'OO"E l-0.00 feet;thence N10o43'00 nW 54.00 feet; thence
S'794\'7'00uW 6.00 feet; thence N10o43'00"W35.00 feet; thence S'7901,7 '00nW 4.00 feet tothe Point Of Beginning, containing 9'7'75
sguare feet, more or less.
MIL]\52 063 \17?616 - I
B.
PAGE 1A
PROPERTY OWNERS AND MAILTNG ADDRESSES:
1) Gasthof Gramshammer, fnc.
t
23L EasL Gore Creek DriveVail, Col-orado 81652
Charl-es H. Rosenquist and Peter S. Switzer,as a partnership and as individualsBarrick, Switzer, Long, Balsley & Van EveraP.O. Box 17109
Rockford, IlLinois 6111-O-7109
Creekside Condomini-um Associationc/o Peter S. SwitzerBarick, Switzer, Long, Balsley & Van EveraP.O. Box 17]-09
Rockford, IlIinois 61110-7109
?\
PROPERTY OWNBRS' SIGNATURES :
GASTHOF GRAMSTAMMER, INC.
CIIARI-.,ES H. ROSENQUIST and PETERS. SWITZER, as a partnership and
as individuafs
Charl-es H.vidually
Peter S.ac a rar rl- Yt a r
and ind
UM ASSOCIATION
MH,J\52063\1?7840.1
A" an( &4@
tzLZ
'Fl_r a Faran,,r'i nrt i -*.._1' -'strument wasy "t lW-,t-iln , n47 ,by
srArE oF EL
OF
da
fore meackno
Witness my hand and official seal .
My commission expires
MH.r\ s2 053 \r.?? B4 o . 1
€ountfof
GASTHOF GRAMSHAMMER,
corporation
whose legal address is I J I B4 gl
Colorado
Recorded at
Reception No.
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED, Made rhis day of
berurcen CHARTES H. ROSENQUIST and PETER S.a partnership, and CHARLES H. ROSENQUIST
PETER S. SWITZER, as individuals
tFthe
r9
SWITZER
and
StaF sf€ql('rado; granto(s), and
INC., a Colorado
Gore Creek Drive, Vaj.1,
of the County of Ea g 1e , State of Colorado, grantee@;
WITNESSETH, That the gmntor(s), tbr and in consideration of the sum of Ten ( $ I 0 )
A11 of the Grantorsr undivided l/Ilths interest, being
Grantorsr entire interest, in and to the real property
more particularly described in Exhibil A attached hereto
and fully incorporated herein by this reference.
alee lman n*5.Sreel{idr|r'fti5eruir
TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and
rcvetsions, remainder and rernaindcrs, rents, issues and profits thereof; and all the estate, right, title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the
Sranto(s), either in law or equity. of, in and to the abore bargaincd premises, with the hereditaments and appurtcnances:
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD thc said premises above bargained and described with the appurtenances, urto the granted$), itS heirs and
assigns forever The grantor(s), for thgmset \/eF,theif heirs and perconal representatives or successors, do covenant and agree that
they shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaccable possession of the grantee$),
i t S heirs and assigns, against all and every peNon or pcrsons claiming the whole or any part thereof, by. thmugh or under rhe grantor(s).
IN WrTNESS WHEREOF, the grantor(s) ha Ve executed this d€ed on the date set forth above.
the rcceipt and sufliciency ofwhich is hereby acknowledged, haVe
bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantee($E itS
if any, situate, lying and being in the
described as follows;
DOLLARS .
granted. bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents do grana,
heirs and assigns forever, all the real property, together with improvements,
County of Eagle , State of Colorado,
SWITZBRa. a pa ership, andividuals
er, as genera
ividuall
CHARLES H. ROSENQUIST and PETER S
CHARLES H. ROSENQUIST and PETER SaevzjL.L4 / ,//->r^Charles H. Rosenquist. asgeneral partner and indivldually
STATE OF €eI€R tDO- f L(1 dt s
county of LUirtP E44A
I
/7GIThe foregoing instrumeqL was qgknowJedged before mc rhis
bv pg*er 5' 5 ui+>tY'
*If in Denver. insen "Citv and."
dayof luarrh
Witness mv hand and official seal.
OFFTC|AL seAf
.i_Arr_ R BORR|SON
ffi{!![r:1,,".$t,ili;s
Bradford Publishing, 1743 wazee Sr., Denvcr, CO 60202 - (303) 292-2500 - 6,90
$q7
No. 16, Rev. $85. spEctAL WARRANTY DEED
SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED
STATE OF COIORADO,
County of
I hercby
office lhis
certiry that this instrument was flled for record
19-
at
-o'clock
-
M., and duly Ecorded
in Book ,Page-.
Film No.R€ceDtion No.
Fees, $
-
Refi|m to:
Scnd future tax statements to:
I
-1"
In my
day of
BR-ADR)RD PIJBLISHING CO
ORDINANCE NO. 1
Series of l99l-
AN ORDINANCE-AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE TOI^IN OF VAIL MUNICIPALCODE BY THE ADDITION OF CHAPTER 17.17 SCHOIiT.-iriE-dEOICNrrOHi;
AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARO T'TNEiO.
i'IHEREAS the Town counci'l of the Town of vail is of the opinion that the
subdivider of land ln each maJor residentiar subdivision or portron of a major
subdivision which is intended for residential use shall a'l locate and conveysites
and land areas fon schoo'l s when such are reasonably necessary to serve the
proposed subdivision and future residents thereof;
NO!{ THEREFORE be rt ordained by the Town councir of the Town of vair,
Col orado:
Section l.
Tit'l e 17 of the Town of vair Municipal code is hereby amended by the
addition of chapter rr-L7, school site Dedications, to read as follows:
17 . t7 .010 PURPoSE
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the Town that whenever there ls
a major subdivision, which is subdivided for res.identia'l use or part.i a.l
residential use' the owner of the land shall provide land for school needs
generated by the proposed residential use. It is the purpose of this chapter to
require the dedication of land on the payment of fees in lieu thereof or both to
fulfill such needs.
Schoo'l land dedication or cash in lieu thereof.
The subdivider of land in each residential major subdivision or portion of
the subdivis'l on which is intended for residential use, sha'l 'l ailocate and convey
sites in land areas for schoo'l s when such are reasonably necessary to serve the
proposed subdivision and future residents thereof, by the applicatlon of the
fonmulas set forth below:
Single fami'ly and duplex
Number of uni ts x
Mul ti -fami ly.
Number of units x .002676
When 'l and is dedicated for
be that r'rhich is useab'l e by the
and shalI be ma.i ntained by the
or primary secondary.
.014495 = dedication requirement in acres.
= dedication requirenrent in acres.
the purpose of providing a school site, it shall
Eagle County School District for such purpose,
School 0istrict .i n a reasonab'le manner until
developed. Said'l and shall be held by the Town of Vail for the School D.i strict
until required by the School District. In the event that the School District
determines subsequent to dedication that the dedicated school site ls not
reasonably necessary, the Town counc.i 1 may, at the request of the school
Di stri ct, sel I the 't and.
!{hen sites and land areas for schoo'l s are not reasonably necessary !o serve
the proposed subdivision and future residents thereof, the Town counc.i l, with
recommendations from the School District and other affected entities, shall
require, in lieu of such conveyance of 1and, the payment in cash by the
subdivlder of a amount not to exceed the full market value of such sltes and land
areas for schools-
The full market value shall mean the current market value of unimproved
land. This value shall be set annually by the Town Council on an acre basis with
recommendations from the School District. The same value per acre shal'l be used
throughout the town.
If the subdivider does not agree with the value per acre, the subdivider
may submit the report by a qualified appraiser who is M.A.L designated, which
establ ishes a new value. The Town Council shalI review the report and determine
if the value is reasonable. Based upon their review, the Town council will
detenmine the value of such land.
l'lhen money in lieu of land is required or when monies have been pa.i d to the
Tovtn CounciI from the sale of such dedicated sites for schoo'l s, it sha'l 'l be held
by the Town Councjl for the acquisition of reasonably necessary sites for the
construction of school facilities, for the construction of employee hous.ing
requined by the school djstrict, for the purchase of employee housing units for
the school district' or for the development of such sites. If housing un.i ts are
purchased, a deed restri ction restricting their use to school district employee
housing sha'l I be required and ownership shal'l remain in the name of the School
District- A subdivision school dedication shall apply onlyonce to the same Iand
area. Dedication sha'l I not be required of re-subdivisions of the same'l and on
a dedication that has previously been made.
Section 17.17.030. Town Exempted.
The Town of vail is specifically exempted from the requirements of this
chapter 17,17.
Section 2, If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase
of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not
-2-
action being either by ordinance, resolution, or motion as the case may be'
If any action by any board or cornnission is appealed to or ca1 led up by the
Town Council, approval sha't I be deemed to occur when a final decision of the
Town Council is rendered approving the site specific development p'l an. The
approval may include such terms and conditions as may be reasonably necessary
to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and the fai'l ure to abide by
any such terms and conditions may, at the option of the Town Council or Town
board or commission as applicable, and after public hearing, result in the
forfeiture of vested property rights.
18.67.040 APPROVAL - EFFECTIVE DATE
A site specific development p'lan sha'l 'l be deemed approved upon the
effective date of the approva'l action re'l ating thereto by the Town Counci'l or
the Town board or commission as the case may be.
18.67.045 VESTED PROPERTY R]GHTS . DURATION
A. A property right which has been vested as provided for ln this
Chapter shall remain vested for a period of three (3) years. In the event
amendments to a site specific deve'l opnent plan are proposed and approved, the
effective date of such amendments for purposes of the duration of the vested
property right, shalI be the date of the approtral of the ori glna] site
specific development p1an, unless the Town Counci'l or applicable board or
commission specifically finds to the contrary and incorporates such finding in
its approval of the amendment.
18.67.050 NOTICE OF APPROVAL
Each map, p1at, or site plan or other document constituting a site
specific deve'l opment plan shal1 contain the fo'l 'l owing Ianguage: "Approval of
this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Article 68 of Title
24, C.R.S., as amended." Fai'l ure to contain this statement shal'l inva'l idate
the creation of the vested property right, In additjon, a notice describing
generally the type and intensity of use approved, the specific parcel or
parcels of property affected, and stating that a vested property right has
been created, shall be published once, not more than fourteen (14) days after
approval of the site specific development plan in a newspaper of general
ci rcul ati on wi th'i n the Town.
18.67.055 EXCEPTION TO VESTING OF PROPERTY RIGHTS
A vested property right, even though once estab'l ished as provided in
this Article, precludes any zoning or land use action by the Town or pursuant
-2-
to an initiated rneasure which wou'l d a'lter, inpair, prevent, d.inrinj sh, or
otherwise delay the deve'l opment or use of the property as set forth in the
site specific der,elopment plan except:
A. lJith the consent of the affected landowners; or
B. upon the discovery of natural or man-made hazards on or in the
'immediate vicin'i ty of the subject property, which hazards could not reasonably
have been discovered at the time of site specific development p'lan approval ,
and which hazards, if uncorrected would pose a serious threat to the public
health, safety, and welfare; or
c' To the extent that the affected landowner receives just compensation
for a'l 'l costs, expenses, and liabirities incurred by the landowner:, including
but not limited to all fees paid in consideration of financing, and all
architectural , planning, marketing, legal , and other consu'l tants fees incurred
after approval by the Town counci'l , or applicable town board or comm.i ssion,
together with interest thereon at the legal rate until paid. Just
compensation shall not include.any diminution in the value of the property
which is caused by such action.
D. The establishment of a vested property right pursuant to'l aw sha'l I
not preclude the applicat.ion of ordinances or regulations which are general in
nature and are applicabie to a] 1 properties subject to land use regulation by
the Tovrn of vail, including but not limited to, building codes, fire,
plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, housing, and dangerous build.i ng
codes, and design review guide'l ines.
18.67.060 PAYMENT OF COSTS
In addition to any and all other fees and charges imposed by the
I'tunicipa'l code of the Town, the applicant for approval of a site specific
development plan shal 1 pay a'l 'l costs relating to such approval as a resu'l t of
the sjte specific deve'l opment plan review including publication of notices,
publ'i c hearing, and review costs. At the option of the Town, these costs may
be imposed as a fee of / nO
18.67.065 OTHER PROVISION UNAFFECTED
Approva'l of a site specific development plan shal'l not constitute an
exemption from or waiver of any provisions of this code perta.i n.i ng to the
development and use of property.
18.67.070 LIMITATIONS
Nothing in this chapter is intended to create any vested property right,
-3-
affect the validity of the remaining pJrtions of this Ordinance; and the Town
council hereby dec't ares it wourd have passed this Ordinance, and each part,
section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase thdreof, regard.l ess of the fact
that any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, crauses, or phrases
be dec'laned i nval i d.
Section 3. The Town councir hereby finds, determines, and declares that
this Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety, and welfare of the
Town of Vail and the inhabitants hereof.
section 4. The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provision of
the vail Municipa'l code as provided rn this Ordinance sharr not affect any r.i ght
which has accrued, any duty imposed, any violation that occurred prlor to the
effective date hereof, any section commenced, nor any other action or proceedings
as commenced under or by virtue of the provision repealed or.repeared and
reenacted. The repear of any provision hereby sharr not revive any provision or
any ordinance previously repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
section 5. Repearer. Ail by1 aws, orders, resolutions, and ord.i nances, or
parts thereof, inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed to the extent only of
such inconsistency. This repealer shall not be construed to revise any bylaw,
order, resolution, or ordinance, or part hereof, heretofore repeared.
INTRoDU.ED, READ, AND AppRovED 0N FIRsr REA'ING THrs r9,!h day of'Februarv ' 1991, and a pubtic hearing sha'l 'l be held on this ord.i nance on the
_ day of
Chambers of the Vai l Municipal
0rdered published in fulI
1991, at 7:30 p.m. in the Council
, Col orado.
of Februarv , l9gl.
Building,
thi s tgrh
,
Vai'l
day
ATTEST:
INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHEOthis 5ttr day of March , 1991.
Rose,
vLA-J
Cl erk
llJ
Towh Clerk
ATTEST:
-3-
AN ORDINANCE
TOI,IN OF VAIL BY
AND
NOl,l, THEREFORE,
COLORADO:
1. Title 18 is
as fol lows:
OROINANCE NO.2
Series of 1937
AMENDING TITLE T8 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE
THE ADDITION OF CHAPTER 18.67 VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS;
SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOI.IN COUNCIL OF THE TOI,IN OF VAIL,
hereby amended by the addition of Chapter 18.67 to read
18.67 .010 PURPoSE
The purpose of this Chapter is to provide
'imp'lement the provisions of Artic1e 68 of Title
18.67.020 DEFINITIONS
the procedures necessary
24, C.R.S., as amended.
A. Site specifjc development plan shall mean and be'lim'ited to a final
major or minor subdivision p1at, or a special development district development
pl an.
B. Vested property right means the right to undertake and comp'lete the
development and use of property under the terms and conditions of the site
specific deve'l opment p'l alr, and shall be deemed estab'l ished upon approval of a
s ite specific development p1an.
18.67.030 NOTICE AND HEAR]NG
No site specific development p] an shall be approved by the Town Council
or any Town board or commission as app'l icable, until after a public heari ng
proceeded by written notice'of such hearing, in accordance with Chapter 8.68
of the Vai'l Municipal Code. Such notice may, at the option of the Town, be
combined with the notice for any other hearing to be held in conjunction w'i th
the hearing on the site specific deve'l opment plan for the subject property.
At such hearing, persons with an interest in the subject matter of the hearing
sha'l 'l have an opportuni ty to present rel evant or materi a'l evi dence as
detenmined by the Town Council or Town board or commission as applicable.
18.67.035 ACTION FOR APPROVAL OF SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN -
CONDITIONS
The action of the Town Council or Town board or comrnjssion as applicable
for approva'l of a site specific development plan shall be in the same form as
that required to approve any request being considered for the subject property
in conjunction with the hearjng on the site specific development plan, such
to
'but only to implement the provisions of Article Gg of rit're 24, c.R.S., as
amended' In the event of the repeal of said Article or judicial determination
that said Article is invalid or unconstitutional or does not apply to home
rule municipalities such as the Town of vail, this chapter shall be deemed to
be repealed, and the provisions hereof no longer effectjve.
2' If any part, section, subsection, sentence, crause or phrase of this
0rdinance is for any reason he] d to be invalid, such decision shall not affect
the va] idity of the remainjng portions of thls ordinance; and the Town Counci'l
hereby declares it wou'l d have passed this Ordinance, and each part, section,
subsection, sentence, c'lause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that
any one or more parts, sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be
dec'l ared i nva'l i d.
3. The Town council hereby finds, determines and declares that this
Ordinance is necessary and proper for the health, safety and we] fare of the
Town of Vail and the inhabitants thereof.
4. The repeal or the repea'r and reenactment of any provision of the
Mun'i cipal code of the Town of vail as provided in this Ordinance sha.l .l not
affect any right which has accrued, any duty imposed, any viorat.i on that
occurred prior to the effective date hereof, any prQsorution corunenced, nor
any other action or proceedings as commenced under or by virtue of the
provision repealed or repea'l ed and reenacted. The repeal of any provision
hereby sha'l 1 not revive any provision or any ordinance previously repealed or
superseded unless expressly stated herein-
5. A11 bylaws, orders, resolutions, and ordinances, or parts thereof,
inconsistent herewith are repealed to the extent only of such jnconsistency.
This repeaier shal'l not be construed to rev.ise any bylaw, order, resolution,
or ordinance, or part thereof, theretofore repealed.
INTRODUCED, READ AND AppR0vED 0N FIRsr REA0ING this a3rr day of
March , 1991, and a public hearing sha'l 'l be he] d on this Ordinance on the
l$- day of uarch , 1991, at 7:30 p.n. in the council chambers of the va.i I
Municipal Building, Vail, Co'l orado.
0rdered published in full this 5rh day of
1991.
Rose,
ATTEST:
-4-
INTRODUCED, READ, AND APPROVED ON SECOND READING AND OROERED PUELISHED
01f+h tulI thts l# day of U^t/!u , teer.
ATTEST:
A. Brandneyer, Town Cl'erk
-5-