HomeMy WebLinkAboutPEC110038 Lotker Variance 071111
To: Planning and Environmental Commission From: Community Development Department Date: June 27, 2011 Subject: A request for the review of a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail
Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a deck addition within the front setback, located at 2664 Larkspur Lane/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Intermountain,
and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110038) Applicant: Marc & Riette Lotker, represented by Michael Maggini Planner: Rachel Dimond I. SUMMARY The applicants, Marc & Riette
Lotker, represented by Michael Maggini, are requesting a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
deck addition within the front setback, located at 2664 Larkspur Lane/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Intermountain. Based upon Staff’s review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum
and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval with conditions of this application, subject to the findings noted in Section VIII
of this memorandum. For reference, the attachments include a vicinity map (Attachment A), the applicant’s letter to the PEC (Attachment B), architectural plans (Attachment C) and photos
of the existing structure (Attachment D). II. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant is requesting a variance from the front setback requirements to facilitate a deck addition and
remodel. The proposed deck material will be wood with open vertical rails, except for the western deck wall, which is proposed to be a solid wood wall six feet in height. The proposed
deck addition and remodel will include a wrap-around deck that spans approximately 65 feet along the front of the house (north side), which will increase the deck from 488 square feet
to 813 square feet. The minimum front setback for structures in the Two-Family Primary/Secondary (PS) District is twenty (20) feet and decks over five (5) feet above grade may encroach
up to
Town of Vail Page 2 five (5) feet into the setback, per Section 14-10-4: Architectural Projections, Decks, Balconies, Steps, Bay Windows, Vail Town Code. For clarity, the structure setback
will be referred to as the setback while the allowable encroachment into the setback will be referred to as the deck setback. The northeast corner of the existing deck encroaches less
than one (1) foot into the 15 foot front deck setback, with a total of less than three (3) square feet in the deck setback. The northeast corner of the proposed deck will encroach up
to 4.56 feet into the deck setback for a total of 103 square feet in the deck setback. Of the 813 square feet of proposed deck area, 710 square feet do not encroach into the deck setback.
The plans also note proposed storage under the deck, but this is actually existing storage to be rebuilt and further reviewed for compliance with GRFA regulations in conjunction with
the design review application. III. BACKGROUND The subject single family residence was constructed in 1980 under Eagle County jurisdiction. The property was annexed into the Town of
Vail through Ordinance No. 15, Series of 1987, effective June 24, 1987. At the time of annexation, the property was legally nonconforming, with the northeast corner of the property built
into the front setback and the deck in the front deck setback. The lot size is also legally nonconforming. The Planning and Environmental Commission has consistently held that construction
of a structure prior to annexation or the adoption of the current zoning regulations may be a basis for granting a variance from the Town’s current zoning regulations. On April 22, 1985,
a side setback variance was requested and approved to facilitate a 100 square foot addition for an expanded home office. However, this addition that would have encroached 6 feet into
the side (east) setback was never built. In 1999, the house was remodeled, with stucco added to the exterior of the structure. In 2001, the wood-burning fireplace was replaced with a
gas fireplace that altered the chimney and deck area slightly. IV. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Title 12: Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code (in part) 12-6C: TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(R) DISTRICT 12-6C-1: PURPOSE: The two-family residential district is intended to provide sites for low density single-family or two-family residential uses, together with such public
facilities as may be appropriately located in the same zone district. The two-family residential district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling,
commensurate with single-family and two-family occupancy, and to
Town of Vail Page 3 maintain the desirable residential qualities of such sites by establishing appropriate site development standards. 12-6D-6: SETBACKS: In the primary/secondary residential
district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum side setback shall be fifteen feet (15'), and the minimum rear setback shall be fifteen feet (15') Chapter
12-17: VARIANCES 12-17-1: PURPOSE: A. Reasons For Seeking Variance: In order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with
the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary
physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the
immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance
with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. B. Development Standards Excepted: Variances may be granted only with respect to the development standards prescribed
for each zone district, including lot area and site dimensions, setbacks, distances between buildings, height, density control, building bulk control, site coverage, usable open space,
landscaping and site development, and parking and loading requirements; or with respect to the provisions of chapter 11 of this title, governing physical development on a site. C. Use
Regulations Not Affected: The power to grant variances does not extend to the use regulations prescribed for each zone district because the flexibility necessary to avoid results inconsistent
with the objectives of this title is provided by chapter 16, "Conditional Use Permits", and by section 12-3-7, "Amendment", of this title. Title 14: Development Standards, Vail Town
Code Code (in part) 14-10-4: ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS, DECKS, BALCONIES, STEPS, BAY WINDOWS, ETC.: C. Balconies, decks, terraces, and other similar unroofed features projecting from
a structure at a height of more than five feet (5') above ground level may project not more than five feet (5') nor more than one-half (1/2) the minimum required dimension into a required
setback area, or may project not more than five feet (5') nor more than onefourth (1/4) the minimum required dimension into a required distance between buildings. A balcony or deck projecting
from a higher elevation may extend over a lower balcony or deck but in such case shall not be deemed a roof for the lower balcony or deck.
Town of Vail Page 4 V. SITE ANALYSIS Physical Address: 2664 Larkspur Lane Legal Address: Lot 4, Block 1, Subdivision Fifth Addition Zoning Designation: Two Family Residential Land Use
Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Current Land Use: Residential Lot Size: 0.2081 acres/9,065 square feet Geologic Hazards: None Development Standard Allowed/Required Existing
Proposed Lot size (min): 15,000 sq. ft. 9,065 sq. ft. No change Frontage (min): 30 ft. 69 ft. No change 80x80ft. square meets req’t No change GRFA (max): 4,170 sq. ft. 2,591 sq.ft. No
change Site Coverage (max): 1,813 sq. ft. (20%) 1,097 sq.ft. (12%) No change Landscape Area (min): 5,439 sq. ft. (60%) 6,833 sq. ft. (75%) No change Setbacks (min): Front setback 20
ft. 18 ft. No change Rear setback 15 ft. 51 ft. No change Side setback (east) 15 ft. 17 ft. No change Side setback (west) 15 ft. 32 ft. No change Deck setbacks for decks above 5 feet
from grade (min): N/A denotes no applicable decks are present or proposed. Front setback 15 ft. 14 ft. 10 ft. Rear setback 10 ft. N/A N/A Side setback (east) 10 ft. N/A 10 ft. Side setback
(west) 10 ft. 14 ft. 14 ft. VI. SURROUNDING LAND USES Land Use Zone District North Residential Two Family Residential South Residential Two Family Residential East Residential Two Family
Residential West Residential Two Family Residential
Town of Vail Page 5 VII. REVIEW CRITERIA 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The proposed deck addition
is associated with an existing residence originally constructed in 1980. The lot was annexed into the Town of Vail on June 24, 1987, and was immediately legally non-conforming. Both
the existing lot and the existing residence are non-conforming in regard to several of the provisions of the Town’s zoning regulations, including front setback and lot size. The Planning
and Environmental Commission has consistently held that construction of a structure prior to annexation or the adoption of the current zoning regulations may be a basis for granting
a variance from the Town’s current zoning regulations. Staff believes the applicant is proposing a deck addition on an existing non-conforming dwelling in a manner that is in keeping
with the general character and architectural style of the neighborhood. Staff does not believe this proposal will have any significant negative impacts on nearby existing or potential
uses and structures in comparison to the existing conditions. Most of the residences in the Intermountain neighborhood were built under Eagle County jurisdiction. Many of these homes
were legally nonconforming with respect to lot size, setbacks and site coverage upon annexation into the Town of Vail. Due to this lack of conformity with the current zoning standards
throughout the neighborhood, an upper level deck encroachment will not seem out of place with the neighborhood. The proposed deck is 7 feet from the property line, but is 34 feet from
the edge of road due to an larger than average right-of-way. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary
to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. Typically, extensive decks
are located in the rear of structures, but in this case, steep slopes prevent such private deck areas. In this case, the only outdoor space is on the front of the house. Most structures
in the vicinity have outdoor space, either at grade, on upper level decks, or both. The expanded deck will allow this property to enjoy similar treatment to other properties in the vicinity.
Staff finds that the requested variance as proposed provides too much relief from the strict interpretation of the setback regulations than necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity
of treatment among sites in the vicinity. The deck setback rules generally assume that a structure will be built to the setback and decks at least five (5) feet above grade will extend
five (5) feet from the structure to provide exterior space. The northeast corner of the existing structure encroaches 2.25 feet into the front setback, which would only allow for the
deck to be 2.25 feet deep at the northeast corner in order to be compliant with the regulations.
Town of Vail Page 6 However, Staff believes the portion of the deck that requires a front setback variance should only be five (5) feet deep in order to meet the intent of the deck setback
regulations to avoid a granting of special privilege. Staff recommends a condition that would limit the variance to allow the deck to be built up to 2.25 feet into the deck setback to
provide compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity. Numerous other properties within the Vail Intermountain Subdivision have requested and been granted approval
of similar setback and site coverage variances due to the location of the structures on each lot, including, but not limited to the following cases: Year Address Legal Description Variance
Description 1987 2664 Larkspur Ln Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Intermountain Front setback variance for garage 1996 2704 Larkspur Lane Lot 5, Block 3, Vail Intermountain Side setback for garage
1998 2625 Larkspur Lane Lot 1, Block 2, Vail Intermountain Front, side and rear setbacks 2000 2865 Snowberry Dr Lot 2, Block 9, Vail Intermountain Front setback 2004 2714 Larkspur Ln
Lot 4, Block 3, Vail Intermountain Side Setback, site coverage and landscaping 2004 2830 Basingdale Blvd Lot 5, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Front setback 2010 2712 Kinnikinnick Ct Lot
10, Block 2, Vail Intermountain Front setback, site coverage for garage 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic
facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff finds the requested variance has no effect on distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities,
public facilities and utilities and public safety, as the deck will not increase the number of people likely to live in this single-family residence. However, Staff finds the requested
variance effects light and air, with an expanded deck area reducing light and air access to the lower level of the house, but will not have any effect on neighboring properties with
respect respect to light and air. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. VIII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Community Development
Department recommends approval with modifications of the request for a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code,
to allow for a deck addition within the front setback, located at 2664 Larkspur Lane/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Intermountain, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Staff’s recommendation
is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose
to approve the variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission make the following motion:
Town of Vail Page 7 “Based on the evidence and testimony presented at this hearing and the review criteria in Section VII of this memorandum, the Planning and Environmental Commission
hereby approves the request for a variance from Section 12-6D-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a deck addition within the
front setback, located at 2664 Larkspur Lane/Lot 4, Block 1, Vail Intermountain, and setting forth details in regard thereto.” Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose
to approve this application, Staff recommends the Commission make the following modifications: 1. Upon further review and approval by the Design Review Board, the applicant is granted
a variance to allow the northeast corner of the deck to encroach up to 2.25 feet into the deck setback, or 7.25 feet into the setback, with a minimum deck distance of 10.5 feet from
the property line. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this application, Staff recommends the Commission make the following findings: “Based on the review
of the criteria outlined in Section VII of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 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 zone district. 2. That the granting of the variance will
not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more
of the following reasons: a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent
with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties
in the same zone district. c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties in the same zone district.” IX. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant’s Request C. Architectural Plans D. Photos