HomeMy WebLinkAboutRucksack_Appeal_101811
To: Vail Town Council
From: Community Development Department
Date: October 18, 2011
Subject: An appeal, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the Town of
Vail Planning and Environmental Commission’s approval of a major exterior
alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Major Exterior Alterations or
Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for the addition of GRFA (Rucksack
Building), located at 288 Bridge Street, Unit R-2/ Part of Lots C & D, Block 5A,
Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC110045); and
an appeal , pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the Town of
Vail Planning and Environmental Commission’s approval of a major exterior
alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7B-7, Major Exterior Alterations or
Modifications, Vail Town Code, to allow for additions of enclosed floor area; a
variance, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, from Section
12-14-17, Setback from Watercourse, Vail Town Code, to allow for
encroachments into the Mill Creek setback and a variance, pursuant to Chapter
12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, from Section 12-7B-15, Site Coverage, Vail
Town Code, to allow for additions of enclosed floor area in excess of allowable
site coverage, located at 288 Bridge Street, Unit R-1 (Rucksack Building)/ Part of
Lots C & D, Block 5A, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard
thereto. (PEC110046, PEC110050)
Applicant: Margo Mullally and Bill Gardiner, represented by Victor Mark
Donaldson Architects
Appellant: Bridge Street Building, LLC
Planner: Rachel Dimond
I. SUBJECT OF THE APPEAL
The appellant, Bridge Street Building, LLC, represented by Jeff Selby, is appealing the
approvals listed above, as detailed in the appeal form in Attachment A. The appellant
contends that “the application for the major exterior modification approved on the
Rucksack Building was not made by condominium association or by the owner of the
Scott Building. The application therefore did not comply with a mandatory provision of
the Code and must be voided.”
II. STANDING OF THE APPELLANT
Staff finds the appellant, as a joint property owner of the development site, has standing
as an aggrieved or adversely affected person. “‘Aggrieved or adversely affected
Town of Vail Page 2
person’ means any person who will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or
furthered 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.”
III. BACKGROUND
The Rucksack Condominiums building, located at 288 Bridge Street, was originally
constructed in the early 1960’s, has been remodeled several times starting in 1966 to
add or expand commercial and residential square footage and was further subdivided in
1978 to create the “Rucksack Condominiums”.
The date of original construction of the former Scott Building is undetermined. The
space has historically been either a restaurant or retail establishment.
On July 9, 2007, Jeff Selby, Charles Rosenquist and Richard Brown, the owners of the
commercial spaces at the Rucksack Building, submitted an application for a major
exterior alteration to renovate Units C-1, C-2, and C-3, the commercials portions of the
structure. On August 27, 2007, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved
that application with conditions. The Design Review Board conceptually reviewed the
addition on June 20, 2007 and instructed Staff to Staff approve the final application,
which occurred on September 12, 2007. On September 28, 2008, a building permit
application was submitted to the Town of Vail, but was withdrawn on October 17, 2007.
On December 17, 2007, Bridge Street Building, LLC, owners of the Rucksack
commercial and the Scott Building, submitted a new application for a major exterior
alteration that would renovate and combine both buildings. Initially, the residential units
were included in the renovation of the structure, but were not ultimately approved as
part of the commercial remodel.
As part of the application, the applicant submitted a description of the proposal that
stated, in part, “Upon approval of the project by the PEC and the DRB, the issuance of
the Building Permit, and as a condition of any Occupancy Permit, the interior lot lines as
delineated on the attached Improvement Survey Plat will be vacated by the execution
and recording of a new Condominium Map for The Rucksack Condominiums.”
On January 14, 2008, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved the major
exterior alteration with conditions. On January 16, 2008, the Design Review Board
approved the exterior alteration application with conditions. On April 7, 2008, a building
permit application was submitted to the Town of Vail and was issued on May 20, 2008.
A plat to legally combine the properties was never filed with the Town of Vail.
On August 11, 2008, the owners of residential units R-1 and R-2 submitted an
application for a major exterior alteration in order to expand their units. However, the
application was withdrawn on September 23, 2008 due to Staff’s determination of
incompleteness.
Town of Vail Page 3
On July 11, 2011, Margo Mullally submitted an application for a major exterior alteration
for Unit R-2. On July 25, 2011, Bill Gardiner submitted an application for a major
exterior alteration to expand his unit, R-1. On August 2, 2011, Bill Gardiner submitted
an application for a variance from the watercourse setback and site coverage to
facilitate his addition. On July 27, 2011, Margo Mullally submitted a Design Review
application. On August 22, 2011, the Planning and Environmental Commission
approved, with conditions, all of the above applications. On August 30, 2011, Mr.
Gardiner submitted his design review application.
On September 1, 2011, Randall M. Livingston, on behalf of the appellant, Bridge Street
Building LLC, submitted an appeal of Ms. Mullally’s PEC approval. As a result, no
further action has been taken to review Ms. Mullally’s addition by the PEC. However,
the Design Review Board approved Mr. Gardiner’s application on September 7, 2011,
with the condition that Ms. Mullally’s addition also be approved, as the designs are
codependent. On September 8, 2011, the appellant submitted an amended appeal
form adding Mr. Gardiner’s approvals to the list of approvals being appealed.
On October 4, 2011, the Vail Town Council granted a continuance of the appeal. Since
that time, Staff has received additional information from the appellant, Bridge Street
Building LLC concerning the appeal. Based on the new information, it appears that the
applications submitted by Mr. Gardiner and Ms. Mullally were either incomplete or
included inaccurate information as to the ownership of the Rucksack Building and the
Scott Building. More specifically, it appears that the applications did not accurately
reflect the required consent of all owners affected by the applications.
Because the Town Council, in an appeal, is not permitted to receive new information or
to make new factual findings, Staff believes that the only available course of action is for
the Town Council to remand both cases back to the PEC for additional factual findings
and determinations.
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Vail Town Council remand both cases back to the Planning
and Environmental Commission to allow the Commission to make findings of fact and a
determination as to whether the original applications were accurate and complete.
V. ATTACHMENTS
A. Appeals form and supporting documents