HomeMy WebLinkAboutBIGHORN TERRACE EXEMPTED LOT LEGAL.pdfo o z (n
-{F c o {o z T m n
={
I
(D
m Ia l-o
t-,, h E I<X f I! }J I Im: d f9s 1 lri g
ImP o l*q I f-:m=r-I 1 T3
o<
dE a9-(io CE >l 6g m-)
'r'l
m
=
=FF
:L --{ r-,3n2
=oc)!) >r
tlLltl
-rl tl Or-
z<
2=o-'z
2^
cn
8=zA -{ \/3;OZ -t^o;
C)
9=
3=o=
ie
?=l -m
fl (l >=
--r o o>trr
\o | 9.n -{m uz >m on -.t >or-
c)?
=m
-t
o €z m
I E
z
T
o
t-rn
-l-
C)
O t-
@
=
-{
o z.
J m | !l (,lJ,o>'r
i
@ t-
'Tl
=z o
o -
-l (D
5 5 o
c)(D
m r m
l--{lo
t€
lz
le t<t>
:
m
q)
z
I
3
tr tr l-l to
l=lo
l-n t<t>l-
ln
Io
lz
l-{
IE
lz
F t<
F
m
F)z p
l
3
I
l=
lz lo 1t
;m
9,z o
*ld 'lz
lo ll
lF l!lm
lF,lz
lo
I
I
I
I
3
=
<r m
c)E
=F <F
T>
trE
Y
lF
ft
I E TH
orb rE N)l rJl .{l
-l
I
tr
r rr
rt
=
=F rr
F ,'z tc
.,4
c)
--t
Ol
I f\)s 5
(J)
F l\)\{
N
q
'"1
7
F tr t p p
m
Y
z [>
F tl
t;
tr.
f-t ft tri GI
--
gz lq m;
,bl 't-l+- o o ll Tl Ki lo |-n
!m
=-l o
(D
m x m 1l i
z
@ I
frid:
'/
ii
O c) /,t\) (7'o)4 f\t 'r a) J'.
--< :.,J.- 7
t:
(OO-630 o9o no q (, f,' \<
RAP
l=-
=o) o -<R{
{E6'
=' :r CL f P-@
-o (u
o =f,a+*
-0)f :lfo)n- <
^:-i o.o r g.3.
JO'o6=c-6'
E oE
-5 +8 n6
=.o _.(J
?rl(D
-:9 o
:QP
qrdr
= s.:-{o=oP-5 sJ
lci
=:6 a ii=;ia3
gRA
dX!.,'d-c.
0){I
0t
f
s.
f
c
c
o
o o
f (o
J o
-l
€
(t-
N
(o
!t f
c
(t,
:
o
o !,
o a
f
o
o
€
o
o t
=o
=
@
='
='
o
o
E
R
b
o
€J
*il I
6',
B
(D
o
ts /'v r,
'/ .4 c't '-, '/ I-
"'?9 ,.. =.
,a ts. 'e
'/i/ I q.o
zt1 rgi I ",Q !-.
ittti =i'Gr o
r-rn
a
m l-'rl
fro<>-nT -im
€
o
o
l
z
T
T m
=ct>z
m
m
m
l<'
lz
lz
Ir-
-i !
O
ll-h-@ >
ll=
[-rlH -il|'l
It_l
il il"l ll(^) I
ll-l
-l
T,o
z
m
t
c m
tr€otr +F 26
'z
=
l'-
z>9R -nd fi:
>o o4 rn=@o z c z
d
i .I
I
z m €
t--"t m
I
z
=z
l-
m
I
m
c
I
I
=z
N -ll =l I (4 {cl
A rr!u\I Cf,rrl E
(-{'l
J q (:1
F{
--{I zl
"l cl I
Nf-;<
;.: m Eo >'n ZO 99 oq o6n ac:
6o zz
No=
!<
o --+n
-2.
=>.'fi
-t,oa d.
>5 QZ ao HN --€FO
=-j'q
d
E H 4 fl
I
I
I
I
(.^)
N)('r
o
o
9l 2l rl EI -l ol zl ol zl ql --.t I ml rl t-ol
t!l
LI
lel l>l
l-1J I
|
-rJ
I tul t<l
l=l l-El r!l
=Lr1
:h=
=ffe i'an z
=
r-{ o iEe z!alo o
=F>I r--r
6J-i nl
I
I
Qr t >t =i l(o 't hr
fsl t'- l @l orl lr
=c
\F
5
o -{
t-
!m n
=
=TI
m m tt
c
U>m {
X
|-m
v c
m T
I -{
m
z
m
m €
m
m
--t
z
m m \)
3 m
z 6
!-
=@ z o
o
.D
(?o
m t-m o
=
f-
(D o
c+
t-
z
c)
m o :
2
'o m
=
t m
=-n
m m (h
VALUATION
!m u
=-{
z o
=trl o
z 6
l-
z
m t-m
6
|-
z
F
c c
c c
3 D 5
q)
f /l /<./<
\,1
(.'r o
c+
,,'.
cr.
'/
2
:-/w +il5s '/') S < '-n e-l
o o z a {a c o {o z
!m a
=-{
o
--
-t
m
Ig L-O t-'.h E t<x f t! >l I lm: 6 l9s I l.ui g ls* I l<r l l=E 5 i5
o<
dP a9 -aO ctt >a 6e m.+o _n
!m
I
=TE ml-{-
2==
YF l-
nnFt
z=
22
=6)z
Z^: --r 4-T
ar
R<z:
r.>OZ i^\J>
z.;
--.t c 3<
A=
?=(
=3 ;=
--t o o>
)D f-
\o t...|Zt)-{m nz >m
-t>
I
=m
€z m
?
z
=IT
-<r-
FN
-
-r
=
I
z
|.
-mm aA o>
_n l-
=O :- -{zl 6)l
oJ lrt:Hlo
EI tl
Fi @
fr.x FI tol rl tl tl tl tt 'l
I m t-m
l;
€z
l l>
;
F
I
|9
lz o .tl
-
E
z
I .t
!
n
s
I
Ol s
F
I .T
-{o €z
o I
t-
t
m
z
l
3
(J
9J o x
ln
fD
;
to
t(o
{t
I
n
t{lo
t=
lz
l-n t<
l>lr-
l:o
lm
t!,,
lz
t9
I
I c^>li rrl
I
I
m
g
U1 c)
@
F
rn f-
F-l
--t
a)
l-r
l9
l6
l<
l>
lfi
I
=
I
l-
m
I
=
o)
=
-
clr
I r\)5
m
F f\)\{
\l
C)o
=
rD
J
z D F
t-
=
(<
ftFln
t
q
.i
9z
mt
I Ir- |t\-lNo tsg 15<lo l'n
?l
m
f
i
ID
m x
m !{
o z
L o
@ q
I
m
'l I
I
I
5 L)rJ
--J
<a (p
o-O-3i5 !-d OO -<
=-
3=.
aO-D(o 6io
:af o0)
!-
gro
o-o
6j * afr'
*ot
srg
+i;;-:.o
'r=
oo
='^
df s.-
o sJ
or(D
a=
*o
q)
o o
o o
=
-<_
=.=:t o
5
3 o -.
g)
l
o-
;-
-:l
o
o
J p.
)=.
=-l
{f
5'qt
l
c)o o
ot
o
0){a
c
(t,
at,
c
o
='
---1
{l
N
!,
B5
o)
=
c
o f
o o
I
2.
o
{
o
c
J
g.
J
o
gt
f
io
\ls
o o z
--{
o
o
U,
m l-
z
{I m
{z
m
IH
l-
I
t-D i>ll
=1"
@ t-
U)-l
z
o
=z
l-
l,
m
=U)z
m m
m
z
l2
L=It lr
m r m o
fro<>-n:
m
-t
€
|.,,
z (n c t-{
z
m
i I
z
rn
t-c
rn
IO tr{
ri-"1 -ZA
'z
-r
a,
z>9R rd n<!.t <
>o ol m:@o z c z :
tl tl tl tl
z m €
t--{
an
i
z
=z
><
--l
m
c 1'
--t ;z
c)N-
zx1 I.:J X T 4):tn F bo
-D'tl x-zo ii qo o-z
Io 6 =6= E b z(t o6 o 'n2z
€
NE=
o,, !
5-<t<
E
H
fn
I
F
P
ts r l0
frl to E t
N)trr
H
t
I
L^)I
I
-t-
i 5
I m
z z o
F
(D
E t-
2
z
-{
rn a
z z
=z
-{x
I
--l
F
2
'n
I o t t-
o
--t m
r\)
.\l
-{o -{
t-.E
m n
=-
'Tl
m m at
a m
x
rfl
z
m
-t
m I
z
m s m €
@
F
m
m
I
z -tl
m m
=m o
z o
a-
!
3 g z o
m t-m
--a v d
a-
t-
z
c)
tn o I
g
2 o
m
=I
m
=-r'l
m m
U)
VALUATION
m u
=
=z
-l q
r-
=m
z o
t-
=o z
m
m
7
-
z
5 t\)
c
l\)
Or ttl
b o
19
O
F
!"o o
c$,\a.r4A
ar
INSPECTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL PERMIT NUM ER OF PROJECT
DATE
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
JOB NAME
,, MON
CALLER
TUES WED THUR FRI AM ,,_1y,,
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS
tr FOUNDATI
/ STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
qr,RouGH / D.W.V.
.g ROUGH / WATER
ON / STEEL
FRAMING
tr
tr
tr
tr
tr
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
SHEETROCK NAIL tr
FINAL
tr
tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
O CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr Q'
tr FINAL tr FINAL
B APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
tr
INSPECTION REQUEST
T NUMBER OF PROJECT
\ ,r.
JOB NAME
CALLER
READY FOR INSPECTION: MON TUES WED THUR FRI
PERMI
DATE
TOWN OF VAIL
AM PM
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr FRAMING tr ROUGH / WATER
_ ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL tr
tr tr
O FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRIGAL:
O TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
D CONDUIT tr SUPPLY AIR
tr o
tr FINAL O FINAL
B APPROVED tr DISAPPROVED . tr REINSPECTION REOUIRED
CORBECTIONS: -
DATE INSPECTOR
lo
PERMIT NUM BER OF PROJECT
ol;e 7- 1- 81 JoB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
TNSPECToN: (6> tr.t
tr
INSPECTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL ".'4 L\A \,,..-
a-.'CALLER I I H,\
/ /,.k\ z..Av.i,pra WED THUR FRI
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr
tr
UNDERGROUND
ROUGH / D.W.V.
ROUGH / WATER D FRAMING tr
tr
tr
tr
D
n ROOF & SHEER " PLYWOOD NAILING GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION
*streernocr
D-
POOL / H, TUB
NAIL
tr FINAL tr FINAL
ELEGTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MEGHANICAL:
tr HEATING
tr ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
tr CONDUIT
D
tr SUPPLY AIR
tr
tr, FINAL tr FINAL
APPROVED
)RBECTIONS: -
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REOUIRED
DATE
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
INSPECTION REQUEST
TOWN OF VAIL
DATE JOB NAME
READY FOR
LOCATION:
INSPECTION:
CALLER
MON TUES THUR FRI WED AM PM
BUILDING:
tr FOOTINGS / STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGROUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
D ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
D FRAMING
- ROOF & SHEER t PLYWoOD NATLTNG O GAS PIPING
O INSULATION O POOL i H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL o
tr tr
tr FINAL
-
O FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
tr TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
O HEATING
D
tr
tr
ROUGH tr EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT D SUPPLY AIR
tr
O FINAL tr FINAL
EI APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REOUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
tr
INSPECTION TOWN OF VAIL
REQUEST
PERMIT NUMBER OF PROJECT
DATE
-
JOB NAME
INSPECTION:MON WED THUR FRI
CALLER
TUES PM AM READY FOR
LOCATION:
BUILDING:
O FOOTINGS i STEEL
PLUMBING:
tr UNDERGBOUND
tr ROUGH / D.W.V.
tr ROUGH / WATER
tr FOUNDATION / STEEL
tr
D
FRAMING
ROOF & SHEER
PLYWOOD NAILING tr GAS PIPING
tr INSULATION tr POOL / H. TUB
tr SHEETROCK NAIL o
D tr
D FINAL tr FINAL
ELECTRICAL:
O TEMP. POWER
MECHANICAL:
tr HEATING
n
tr
D
ROUGH O EXHAUST HOODS
CONDUIT O SUPPLY AIR
I] FINAL tr FINAL
tr APPROVED
CORRECTIONS:
tr DISAPPROVED tr REINSPECTION REQUIRED
DATE INSPECTOR
I ero;""t Application
.i' . ) i:.
Proiect Name:
Project Description:
Contact Person and Phone
Owner, Address and Phone:
Architect. Address and Phone:
Block \-i
Fillflg !.Legal Description: Lo-t
Comments:
Design Review Board
',1 t ,Date
Motion by:
,l' ,:;
Seconded by:
APPROVAL DISAPPROVAL
Summary:
Town Plan ner
Date:
E statt Approval
t t
_l
I aa
t
I /T
t o ,
hwn lltl
75 soulh fronlage road
Yail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-7000
!l z )
offlce ol clmmunlty dcvelopmonl
rr r I
t
. tl tl- F+t+ | ,',7 ), ",
l) t'r '"t
- /
/Avte/*r+utsurl
lztt' 6tuq,ar$a-
Eg
6-z_86
louT+tu€t-f
t t
I t?., /.r trc\ Lz /rJ rH-o ' '- 'I r---=o l\)-/ L,-7 -1..4 ,/'--rL t I LDL*t4{stl,le
No<"rt*_
E_H
D-Z-8D
4atuuEs-T H....-._
AP PtI CA+I ON
FOR PROPERTIES IN
FOR ADDITIONAL GRFA
EXCESS OF ALLONABLE GRFA
Date of Appl ication
Date of DRB Meeting D-za- a
a5-E ?a
A pre-application conference with a rnember of the planninq staff is stronolv
encouraged to discuss the provisions under which additionil gRfR can be aJaeO
PRE-APPL ICATION CONFERENCE
for additions under this section
This includes alI information
Board submittal requirements.
to a site. It should be understood that this ordinance does not assure each properry an-additional 250_square feet of GRFA. Rather, the ordinance allows for -qp tb 250 square feet if certain conditions are met.
Appl ications
are comp I ete .
Design Review
will not be accepted unless they
requi red on this form as vtel I as
a LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
Address
Legai Description: Lotb-P Fitoci Filing 4dff6D
Zone D'istri & g(Q IbL r+ -f€F4<a<-e 3"+BDl VG toN
c. NAME 0F APPLIIANI: aLM {b-(L.Gi
Add,"rr 421 1 Gue M&t*J€ @tV€ pnon&_g_:Z!ZE
D.NAME 0F APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: 447
Address
E. NA|'IE 0F OWNER(S):M.
Signature(s)
Address
F.Filing Fee of $100.00 is required at tine of submittal ilDt r1
n\uo
The following information, in addition to DRB required with this submittal:
l. Verification that the unit has received
2. Names and mailing addresses of adjacent
un.its on the same lot. This information
Assessor's office.
submittal recuireme shal I
Condominium association approval (if appl icable).
Exjsting f1 oor plan of structure.
t-Qfut'$tt
a final certificate of
property owriers and of
'i s avai I abl e from the
non"_h-e:_4!3
occupancy,
owners of
Eagl e County
?
NAME OF PROJECT:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
STREET ADDRESS:
DESCRIPTION OF PR
MATERIALS k,
4ts4ti4
Botanical Name
indicate height for conjfers.
(over)
Fasci a
Soffi ts
Wi ndows
Window Trim
Doors
Door Trim
Hand or Deck Rai'l s
Fl ues
Fl ashi ngs
Ch i mneys
Trash Enclosures
Greenhouses
0ther
B. LANDSCAPING: Name of
PLANT MATERIALS:
PROPOSED TREES
EXISTING TREES TO
BE REMOVED
Des i gner :
phone:
Si ze*
*Indicate caliper for dec'iduc'ious trees.
Botanical Name Conrnon Name ' Quanity Si ze
EXISTING SHRUBS
TO BE REMOVED
Tvpe Square Footage
GROUND COVERS
SOD
SEED
TYPE OF
I RRI GATI ON
TYPE OR METHOD OF
EROSION CONTROL
C. OTHER LANDSCAPE FEATURES (retain'ing wa11s,nces, swimming poo1s, etc.) Please specify.
PLANT MATERIALS:
(con't)
SHRUBS
MI NUTT S .VAIL TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
JULY 1, 1986
7:30 p. m.
A regular meeting of the Vail Town
7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Councjl was held on Tuesday,July 1, 1986, at
MEMBERS PRESENT:Paul Johnston, Mayor
Kent Rose, Mayor Pro Tem
Dan Corcoran
Gail Wahrl ich-Lowenthal
Hermann Staufer
Eri c Affel dt
Gordon Pi erce
MEMBERS ABSENT:
TOWN OFFICIALS PRESENT:Ron Phi I I i ps, Town Manager
Larry Eskwith, Town Attorney
Pam Brandmeyer, Town Clerk
The first item on the agenda was Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1986, first reading,
regarding the annexation of the Solar Crest -area of West Vail into the Town of Vajl
and amendjng the zoning map in TElitToli-to the annexed property. Mayor Johnston
read the fulI title. Rick Pylman explained the ordinance and the zoning changes
proposed. After a short discussion by Council, Gail Wahrlich-Lowenthal made a
motion to approve the ordinance, and Hermann Staufer seconded. A vote was taken and
the motion passed unanimously 5-0.
The next jtem on the agenda was Ordinance No. 17, Seri es of 1986, first reading, an
ordinance defining when a dog constitutes a nuisance and expanding the areas of the
leash law. Larry Eskwjth gave background information. He also noted a correction
in Section 4, line 6, which read "... or any athletic event..." t0 "... while any
athletic event ...". After a discussion, Hermann Staufer made a motjon to approve
the ordinance. Dan Corcoran seconded. A vote was taken and the motion passed
unanimously 5-0.
The thjrd item on the agenda was the appeal of the PEC decision approving the&&_
Gorsuch deck. Tom Braun detailed backqround information and listed the criteria the
--_------=--:-_
---TEC used to make their decision. There was no representative present for the
appealing party. There was no discussion by the Council or public. A motion was
made to uphold the PEC decision by Kent Rose, which was seconded by Gajl tlahrlich-
Lowenthal . A vote was taken and the motion passed unanimously 5-0.
The fourth item was an appeal of the PEC decisjon denyjng a GRFA varjance request of
ggg residence. Kristan Pritz gave background information on the
appeal . Jr-m 8oy1)gave his reasons why the appeal should be approved. There was a
I engthy dittTi55i-on by Counci 1 , Peter Patten, Kri stan Pr j tz and Tim Boyl e. Dan
Corcoran made a motion to uphold the PEC decision, and Hermann Staufer seconded.
Djana Donovan gave comments on the appeal . A vote was taken and the motion passed
unanimously 5-0.
The fifth item on the agenda was Resolution No. 18, Series of 1986, supporting the
Town of Vail request to the State Division of Highways to reduce the speed limit on
the South Frontage Road. Tom Braun explained the reasoning behind the resolution.
After some discussion by Councjl to extend the 25 m.p.h.speed zone from the
intersection of Vajl Road and the South Frontage Road easterly to the area of the
Ford Park tennis course and reduce the speed'l imit to 35 m.p.h. from the Ford Park
tennjs courts to VaiI Valley Drive, with the 45 m.p.h. zone east of Vail Va11ey
Drive maintained as presently existing, Dan Corcoran made a motion to approve the
resolution with the changes discussed. Kent Rose seconded. A vote was taken and
the motion passed unanimously 5-0.
The next item on the agenda was consideration of an air rights easement for Cascade
ViUg_ge qXgi_tlift. Tom Eraun gave a bri ef overvjew of the request for easement
since it had been discussed at the Work Session that afternoon: he also mentioned
changes had been made which Council had requested. Dan Corcoran suggested labeling
the three Exhibjt A's for reference identity. Larry Eskwith suggested there be a
term period in case the Forest Service did not approve the request; Council decided
to make the easement effective upon Forest Service approval within eighteen (18)
O puBLrc NoTrcE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Tim Boyle and Debbie Nicholson have appl.ied to
the Design Review Board for permission to add 250 square feet to their
residence Iocated at 4zl7 co] umbine Drive, Lot zo-D, Bighorn Terrace
Subdivjsion, in order to build a third floor addjtion.
There wilI be a heari ng on this subject at the Design Review Board meeting
scheduled for 3:00 pm on September 3, 1996 in the Town council chambers in
the VaiI Municipal Bui'tding.
Any corrnents and questions can be addressed to Kristan pritz at (303)
476-7000 and must be given by August 25, 1986.
TOM BRAUN
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
TOl.lN OF VAIL
Publjshed in the Vajl Trail on August g, 19g6
t./ /-
,[- tt-, ( t lt
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
June 23, ]986
2:15 P.M. 3:00 P.M.
Site Inspections Publ ic Hearjng
2 1. A request for a GRFA varjance of 395 square feet
'i n order to add a third story addition to a
residence on Lot 20-D-l of Bighorn Terrace.
Appf icantsl Tim Boyle and Debbie Nicholson
I 2. A request for a conditional use permit in order to place a satellite banking facility in the
Mi l I Creek Court Bui 1di ng.
Appl icant: VaiI National Bank
3. Consideration of initial zoning of an area
recently annexed and owned by Vail Associates
known as "Soraddle Creek."
Applicant: Town of VaiI
4. Appointment of a PEC member to DRB for Ju1y,
August and September
5. Approval of minutes of May 28 and June 9.
-.*
T0: Town Council
FR0M: Commun'i ty Development Department
DATE: July I, .1986
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning and Environmental Cornmission's decision to deny a
request fon a GRFA variance of 395 square feet in order to add a third story addition to a residence on Lot 20-D-l of Bighorn
Terrace. Applicants: Tim Boyle and Debb.le Nicho'l son
0n June 23, 1986, the Planning and Environmental Commission voted to deny the
applicants'request to add 395 square feet to their unit in Bighorn Terrace. The
motion was made by Jim Viele and seconded by Peggy Osterfoss. The vote was 7-0.
The GRFA allowable for this unit is 604 square feet. Presently the GRFA is 748
square feet. The applicants are requesting to add another 395 square feet to
create a third floor which would create a total GRFA of 1,143 square feet. This
request would result in the GRFA being 539 square feet over the allowable GRFA.
The staff is counting 250 square feet of the total 395 square foot variance as a
request under Ordinance 4, 'l985 which allows for additions up to 250 square feet.
The staff recommended denjal of the request, as it was felt that the proposal did
not meet the intent of Ordinance 4 and would also be considered a grant of special
privilege.
The Planning and Environnental Commission made the following corments about the
request :
1. Piper felt that 0rdinance 4 should be upheld, as t'tre-s.taff';'PEC, and
CounciI had studied in depth the GRFA issue. The 250 square foot figure
was arrived at by analyzing previous GRFA requests and determining an
appropriate amount of GRFA.
2. Donovan felt that the variance was definite'ly a decision for the Council.
Personally, she was sympathetic to the request, but felt that it was a policy decision that should be made by the Council-
3. Donovan also mentioned that additions that have occurred in Bighorn Terrace
have helped to break up the box-l ike original structures.
4. Viele stated that, given Ordinance 4, the Planning Commission does not have
the tools to rev'i ew reguests which ask for GRFA beyond the 250 square feet. It was felt that the ordinance generally discourages this type of
vari ance request. The request should go to Counci1 as they have the option
to make a policy decision on each variance.
5. Donovan and Piper felt that addjtional landscaping is needed on the
property if the third story addition is approved.
6. The telephone wire that crosses the top of the building should be studied
so that there is not a problem when the addition js constructed.
Please see the enclosed memo which explains in detail the variance request.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
June 23, 'l 986
PRESENT STAFF PRESENT
Diana Donovan
Bryan Hobbs
Pam Hopkins
Peggy 0sterfoss
Duane P iper
Sid Schultz
Jim Viele
Peter Patten
Kristan Pritz
Rick Pylman
Betsy Rosolack
l. A reouest for a GRFA variance of 395 square feet in order to add a third
Applicants: Tim Boyle and Debbje Nicholson
Kristan Pritz explained the request and showed the site plan and also the
elevatjons of the new and the previous proposal one year ago. She stated that
one year ago the applicants came before the PEC with a request for setback
variances and with the same request for a GRFA variance. The PEC granted the
setback variances and denied the GRFA variance. In the current request, the
exterior design of the thjrd level had been changed, but the floor plan and the
amount of GRFA variance being requested were identical to the request one yean
ago. She reviewed the memo, stating that the staff felt that it would be a
grant of special pri vilege to approve the request because the applicants could
upgrade their unit wjthin the 250 square foot limit of Ordinance 4 of 1986.
Tim Boyle, one of the applicants, stated that the reason he came back to the
PEC was because last year he djd not take advantage of the opportunity to
appeal the decision of denial to the Town Council. He stated that 250 square
feet was tough to work with. He added that since the roof 1eaks, he could
correct the leak at the same time that he added a third f'l oor.
Viele pointed out that the PEC and Council had al1 agonized over the amount of
GRFA to be placed in 0rdinance 4. He felt that it was a policy issue and
precedent setting. Hobbs and Osterfoss agreed with Viele. Piper added that
much deljberation had gone into establishing some means for upgrading units and
some limits to that ordjnance, and that it was not a slam dunk thing. Piper felt that if the request were granted, more landscaping should be added to the project. Pritz pointed out that this would be dealt with in DRB.
Patten stated that if the request had been for 250 square feet or 1ess, the
request would have gone straight to DRB, not to the PEC. Donovan felt there
should be more landscaping and that the phone wires were dangerous. She felt
this request should go to the Council to be reviewed. Oonovan felt this design
was better and landscaping would help to scale the building down.
Viele moved and 0sterfoss seconded to deny the request per the staff memo. The
vote was 7-0 for denial
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning and Environmental Commission
Commun ity Development Department
June 23, 'l 986
A request for a density.ynqiance of 395 square feet in order to
add a thjrd story adFftion t\ a residence on Lot 20-D-l of Bighorn
Terrace Subdivision bt 4277 0olumbine Road.App'licants: Tim Boy\g3gp,6bbie Nichotson
I. DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED
The appljcants wjsh to add a third story to their two stony single family residence. In order to construct this addition, a GRFA variance of 395 square feet is needed. In June of 1985, the applicants came
before the Planning Cornrnission with a request for setback variances and with the same reguest for a GRFA density varjance. The planning
Commission granted the setback variances and denied the GRFA variance.
Minutes from that meeting indicate that the reason for the denial was that it wou'l d have been a grant of spec'ial privilege and that jt was disregarding 0rdinance 4, Series of 1985 which was.intended to allow
home owners to apply for no more than 250 square feet of additional GRFA to upgrade their homes. In the current reguest, the exterior design of the third level has been changed, but the floor plan and the amount of
GRFA variance being requested are identical to the request of June 1985.
The enclosed memo fron June .|985 shows a table of statistics for this property. The GRFA allowab'l e for this unit js 504 square feet.Presently, the GRFA is 748 square feet. The applicants are requesting to add another 395 square feet which would make a total GRFA of .|,143
square feet. This request would result in the GRFA be.i ng 539 square feet over the allowable GRFA. The staff will count 250 square feet of the total 395 square foot varjance request as a request under grdinance
4, 1985, which aljows for additions up to 250 square feet_ The applicants are requesting 145 square feet above the 250 square feet.
The intent of Ordinance 4 is to address this type of upgrading for dwelling units which have been located within the Town of Vail at least five years.
II. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon rgvielt of Criterie end Findings. Section 18.62.060 oflle__Uqj_qigl_
Consideration of Factors:
The relationship of the uested variance to other existi tenti al
uses and structures in the vicinity.
A third story would somewhat'impact the neighbor to the south. In general ,units in Bighorn Terrace are only two stories. The new third story will
appear out of character with the rest of the subdivision. However, the
impacts from the third story are minor due to the location of the windows and
views in the adjacent unit.
Thq degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and
entorcg4ent of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility
al4 un]formjty gf trgalment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the
objectives of this title without grant of special pnivilege.
The staff feels that it would be a grant of special privilege to approve this
GRFA varjance. The enclosed memo from June 1985 gives a history of Bighorn
Terrace variance reguests. This table indicates that approving the GRFA
variance would be a grant of special privilege due to the large anount of
GRFA. There have been 7 requests for additional GRFA. The staff recommended
approval of only one in 1977 for 130 sguare feet and recommended denial of
the others. 0n1y two requests were for an amount greater than .l30 square feet, that of Rowe in .1978 fon 473 square feet and Curfman jn 1980 fon 'l 77
square feet. Staff believes that to approve this GRFA variance would be
inconsistent with other requests that have been acted upon withjn Bighorn
Terrace -
More importantly, staff feels that this request disregards 0rdinance No.4
which was jntended to address upgrading of existing homes by a1 Iowing smal 1
GRFA additions for site improvement trade offs. The PEC and Town Council
worked for over a year to write an ordinance that would allow small scale
improvements to occur to older residences without allowing an excessive
amount of additional mass or bulk. The ordinance specificaily states:
.l8.71.010 Purpose
"The purpose of this chapter is to provide an inducement for the
upgrading of individual dwel1ing units in cerain structures which
have been in existence within the Town of Vai l for a period of at
least 5 years by permjttjng the addition of up to 250 sguare feet of gross resi denti a'l f I oor area to dwel I i ng uni ts 'i n sai d structures.... Proposals for any additions ....shall be reviewed
closely with respect to site p1ans, impact on adjacent properties,
and applicable Town of Vail development standards."
It should be noted that the applicants were made aware of the opportunity to
add an addit'i onal 250 square feet of GRFA under this ordinance. However, the
applicants chose not to pursue their request under this process.
Boy'le 6/23/85 -2-
Staff believes that applicants'desire to upgrade their unit can be achieved
within the 250 square foot limit.
The effes! of the requested variance on light and air, distribut'ion of
population. transportation and traffic facilities, publjc facjljties and utilities. and public safety.
The al'l owed height in the Medium Density Multj-Fami1y zone district js 38
feet for a sloping roof. The existing height is 18 feet and the proposed
height is 35.6 feet. The third floor addition will decrease s1 ightly the
amount of light and air between the Boyle's unit and the unit to the south.
Such other factors and cllterra as tje cpmmrssjon deems applic
proposeo var'r ance
III. FINDINGS
The Planning and Environmental Cornmission sha'l I make the following findings
before granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constjtute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the I imitations on other propert'i es classified in
the same district.
That the grantjng of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or we1fare, or materialIy injurious to properties or
improvenents in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the fo1 lowing reasons:
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 tjtle.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply genera'l 1y to
other properties in the same zone.
The strict or ljteral interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would depri ve the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the
owners of other properties in the same district.
Boyle 6/?3/85 -3-
IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The staff recommends denial of the GRFA variance. This request conflicts with the intent of Ordinance No. 4 which allows for iaaition, of up to 250 square feet. Staff believes that the appl.i cants coulJ work within'the allotment of 250 square feet for ttreir iidition. iiie-appiicants trave-ttre opportunity to add 250 square feet either on the th.i rd ?ioor or perhaps on the ground floor. Staff realizes that setback variances would u" n".!i"irv for an addition on the ground floor. However, it is feit'that by ;a;ti;; "rilfll th9 !50 square feet, the intent of the'orJinin.. is upnerd and the additional GRFA would not be a grant of special pri"ii"g". It arso is felt that the scale and character of the existing sub;jvjsj;; would be maintajned by this alternative. Staff feels that to aiprove #re enrn variance request of 395 squane feet would be to-disregard ord.i nance + nti.r, is designed to provide a streamlined process for pr6perty owners who wish to upgrade the.i r un its.
(
Boyle 6/23/85 -4-
\-,f, --:s'7\ .,t. 1-<+!'io 7
't|J
't
o
.o'oL 7.L,-qLN
---lr
I
i
I
t
I
I
x
I
I
t
I
i
+
\
Y
rJ:
z ld |l
o o:o
7
\
I t,
I \t
\\\
!({c)
lrl (
la\t
o z
o L
x
I
x
I
I t--J
T
IL a
IJ
+J
a.
TI
i t/l
I
i
I
:
IrJ
U z u
lI
o o
I
\9
l-lf\
, t'a
)t1ag s'L'g -
r.-lc\
i
o
I
o
AJ
F o J
bi
t-
;
lc\k.
a
I F
n
g
{:
U
o
lr
o o V
TJ 6
^cu
,i
rl il
\
I
I
I
I
I
;
L
o
tc\
lc.
z
,o ll
q^
il
I
\;.:g
"l t$l-5i l+IU l(^
Zn +l
O; ul co H >N U oF ,"\
9Jr.2 v d- q
ubo
,o'oL M,Lr.9L e
?
\_I r
rt
)
-,
3
o
i
I (
:
(
O,q.
cl -
o(
Qr(
tl
r-r |.
(
ArlrzllrrA
-o
loa)
(
----c q'z)
___1D 0.6
z o a F a-a o <o
JE lll x >s ul J
a'E E It
lF
West Elevation
1/4":1'S
fuz'uooo 4t4bv6-
C
,I lbav
North Elevation
1/{-.1'-o"
L
(
lb.oz'I
.l 4n'u'
South Elevation
1/4":1'-O"
r
\
FePFoe? 1q.1tlr6+
\ o.oa'
East Elevation
1/4"21'-O"
-
c-.t
a-.....'-
fO3
FROlt3
DATEs
Total amount over
Setbacks Required:Setbaeks Existing:
Parkinq:
allowable! 539.4 sf with addition
20 feet on all sides
O feet north side 9.7 feet on south side 19.2 feet on east side 12.1 feet on west side
Planning and Environmental Conmisaion
CoEDuni ty Developnent Department.
ilune lO, 1985
suBtEcr: Requeat for eider front and rear setbacks and for a GRFA variance of 395 aquare feet in order to add a third story addition to a reaidence on Lot 2O-D-I of Bighorn Terrace Subdivigion at 4277 Columbine Road. Applicants: Tirtr Boyle and Debbie Nicholgon
DESCRTPTION OF YARIANCE RE9UESTED
The applicants wish to add a third atory, including a clerestory to their tvro story single family residence. rn order to construct this addition, a GRFA variance of 395 square feet and setback variances are needed. The following tabre shor.rs the GRFA and variance statisti.cs for this property:
Zonei Medium Density Multiple-Family Lot Area z 1724 sf
GRFA:
Existing:748 sf Allowed: 604 sf
Va r ia nce
Proposed: 395 sf
Total with variance: 1r143 sf
t \-
Required: 2 spaces./SOo to 2rOOO sf of GRF.A Presently the site has one parking space. The parking is considered to be a legal non-conforming situation.This request does not increase the GRFA beyond 2rOOO sf which would necessitate an additional parking space.Thereforer th€ legaL non-conforming situatlon is adequate for the addition.
BovleJ- 6/10/85
He ight:Limit is 35 feet for a flat roof, 38 feet for a sloping roof. Request is for 33 feet.
The GRFA allowabre for this unit is 604 square feet. presentlyl the GRFA is 748 square feet. The appliCants are requestiiig to add another 395 square feet vhich would make a total GRFA of lr l43 square f eet. This request r"rouJ.d result in the GRFA being 539 square feet over the alLowabl-e GRFA. The sLaff will count 25o square feet of the total 395 square foot variance as a request under Ordinance 4 which allows for additions up to 25o square feet. The intent of ordinance 4 is to address this type of upgrading for dwelling units which have been located within the Town of vail at least five years. rf ordinance 4 Idere not applied to this requestl the applicants would be able to add another 250 square feet in the future. For this reasonr it is important to incorporate the GRFA request under ordinance 4.
Because of the sma 1r. size of the Lots in Bighorn Terracer the exi.sting building encroaches into the required 2o foot frontr sidel and rear aetbacks. This unit encfoaches 2o feet. on the north, lO.3 feet on the southr 7.9 feet on the west and O.g feet on the east side. The proposed addition wiLl be located on top of the existing structure. The addition wiLt not encroach any further into the 2o foot setbacks than does the existing unit. The same setback encroachments are being requested foi the third floor addition. (Please see site pIan. )
The following is the applicant's request:
"The purpose of this Ietter is to request a GRFA variance for a proposed addition to my residence aE 427 7 Columbine Drive. The addition will consist of an additional story on top of the existing two story structure. As such, I will not be approaching any set-backs nor wirl r be increasinq the footprint of the building. I intend to holit the nei ridge of the building ber.o'r the 33' height restrictionr so again no variance will be required on that point. As you are aqrare, Bighorn Terrace is composed of a number of smal,I single family and duplex residences on extremely smarr sites- Many of the ohrners in this subdivision have done additions to their residencesr typically adding on to the perimeter ot the buildings. Due to the postage stamp size of our lotr I feel that an addition upward will have less impact on the site and Lhe neighborhood than a perimeter addition. Also the flat roof design of this ear]y vail home has caused us numerous problems with Leaks that have to be addressed by creating a slope on the existing building. By going up with the additionr I wilL basically be solving the roof problem and creating addi.tional space at the same t.ime. Presently the home has two smalL bedrooms and one snarl bath which make it nearly impossible to consider having a family. I intend the finished building to be
Borle -!/10/Bs
considerably nore attractive than the nansard roof which is presently on the site. As many other residents of Bighorn Terrace have been granted variances to improve their properties; I feel that I have a right to enjoy the same privilege. The proposed addition wilt be approximately 4O0 square feet. I do not feel that the granting of thi;variance wirl affect. the lightr airr distribution of population,transportationr trafficr utilities or public safety in the area. The increased height of the building will not have a detrimentar effect on the two neighborsr as neither have a vier,r or sun corridor through this volume; trees taller than the proposed addition exist on two sides of the houser between our house and the two neighbors noted above. fhe residents across the streets are in taller buildings than the proposed nev level and should not be affected by this addition. fn shortr I feel that relief from the strict interpretation of the GRFA reguirement is necessary in this case if I am to receive equal treatment as a number of other sites in my vicinity...
CRITERIA AITD FINDINGS
{
06O of the Uunicipal goE, thg =oepsrtnett
GRFA variance based upon the folloving factors:
Consideration of Factors:
The r.elqtignship of_ the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
A.
B.
Setback Yariancee
The requested setback variances presently exist. The applicati.on is for a third story on a structure that is a.lready encroaching on aI1 four sides into the required setback restrictions.The encroachments due to the addition shouLd not substan-tiallyimpact adjacent units, as the setback encroachments already exi st.
GRFA Variance
A third story wouLd somewhat impact the neighbor to Ehe south. The units in Bighorn Terrace are on small lots trith the result that theqe is not much space between buildings.In generaf,r units in Bighorn Terrace ire only two storijs.The new third story wiJ. I appear out of character wlth the rest of the subdivision. However, the impacts from the third story are negligible due to the location of adjacent units t windows and -views.{
Boyle -4- ry/8s
vI'cln oE to attain the obiectives ot special privilege.
A.
B.
Setback Variances
DATE APPL I CANT
Staff feels that due to the existing buildingr it would not be a special privilege Eo grant the varianc"s for setbacks as the setback encroachments wirr. not be any greater than those existing encroachments.
GRFA Variance
Staff feels that it would be- a grant of special privilege to approve this GRFA variance. .The forrowing chart shows variance requests in Bighorn Terrace have been approved:
VARIANCE REQUEST HISTORY OF BIGHORN TERRACE SUBDIVISION
TYPE OF AMOUNI OF
VAR I ANCE
ST/.FF
RECOi'iMTNDAT I ON
PEC
ACT] ON
Ile 999r: !E. -!o 'lrhigh r ct ?r lirerar inrerpretation and enforcercent of a spec cgnpatibilty and unifornity or tieETnEnE-a-'iil6iE =ites in the
REOUEST
t4ar 17
May 78
July 78
Aug
Aug
Aug
Sep 82
Nov 83
Feb li
Benysh
Rowe
Al der
Turnbul I
Curfman
0dum
0dum
Houston
Sherr
GRFA
Set back
GRFA
Se tback
GRFA
Setback
Setback
GRFA
GRFA
Setback
Setback for
Ai rl ock
GRFA
Setback
130 sq 8ft
473 sq
7.5
75 sq 8ft
7ft
177 sq
122 sq 'lB ft
l8 ft
Approval
Approval
DeniaI
Denial
Deni al
Den'i al
Approva'l
Den'i al
Den'i al
Approval
Approvai
Deni al
Den i al
DeniaI
App roval
Approval
Approvai
Approval
App ro va I
Approva)
Approval
Approval
Approval
Table
Appro va1
App roval
Approval
App rova I
App rova 1
IL
IL
ft ft
ft
ft
78
(JU
8?
B0 sq ft
16 ft
GRFA 50 sq ft
3 Setbacks 3,.l .l , & 13 ft
I
The chart indicates that approving the setback variances would not be a grant of special privilege. However, it does show that approving the GRFA variance would be a grant of special privilege due to the large amount of GRFA. fhe." have- been 13 requests for additionar cnra- The staff recommended approval
aovle -5f/10/8s
of only one in L97 7 for I3O square feetr and recommended deniaL of the others. only two requests were for an amount. greater than l3osquarefeet,thatofRowein1978andCurfmaninl980.
(Rowe is Boyle's neighbor to the south-) Statf betreveg thar to approve this GRFA variance would be inconsistent with other requests that have been granted in Bighorn Terrace. More impor-tantlyr atdff feels that this reguest disregards Ordinance No. 4 which was intended to address upgrading of existing homes.fhe PEC and Tordn Council have worked for over a year to write an ordinance that would allow home owners to apply for no nore than 25O square feet of additional GRFA in order to upgrade their homes. The ordinance specifically states:
18.7l.OlO purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to provide an inducement for the upgrading of indiv.iduaL dwelling units in certain structures vhich have been in exi.stence rilithin the Town of Vail for a period of at least 5 years by permitting the addition of up to 25O square feet of gross residential floor area to dwelling units in said atructures. ... Proposals for any additions shal1 be reviewed closely with respect to site plans, impact on adjacent propertiesr €rDd applicable
Town of Vail development standards. "
It should be noted that the applicants lrere made aware of the opportunity to add an additional 25O square feet of GRFA under this ordinance. However, the applicants chose not to pursue their reguest under this process. The GRFA variance request is 145 square feet over the 25O square feet allowed under Ordinance 4. A great amount of work hrent into Ordinance 4 to insure that the amount of GRFA that could be added would be adequate for upgrade additions and that the additional GRFA would not be such a large amount that it nould detract from the property.
To grant the GRFA variance of 395 square feet would go against the intent of Ordinance 4. The 25O square foot figure was arrived at by a great deal of discussion and research. Staff believes that this figure is not arbitraryr and that the applicants'desire to upgrade their unit can be achieved within the 25O
square foot limi t.
The effect 9f the requested v.ariance on light and airr distribution gf pgpulatioqr trEnsportation gnd traffic facilitiesr public faciLities and utrfitiesrand publi
t* a*.a tt"* addition will decrease slightly the amount of light, and air between the Boyle's unit and the unit to the sout.h.It is felt that the third floor addition is not particularly in character and scale with the rest of the subdivision. Howeverr the structure will be within the MDMF height reguirement if the third floor is added.
Jvle -6- 6/10/8s
Related Polices in Vail.s Communi Action Plan
Under the headingr "Community Design" No. 2 states:
"Upgrading and remodeling of structures and site should be encouraged.
- Stimulate community awareness
- f ncent ive s "
Staff encourages upgrades.must be adressed.However , zoning/ variance criteria
Such other factors and criteria as
improvements
the commission deems Iicable to the proposed variance.
FIlIDINGS
The Planninq and Environmental con4ission qDell rakg the_folroeing
That the granting of the variance witr not consitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on Jther properties cLassified in the same district.
That the granting of the variance wirl not be detrimental to the public heaLth, safetyr or we.Lfarer or materially injurious to proerties or improvements in the vicinity.
That the variance is qrarranted for one or more of the forlowing rea son s:
The strict or riteral interpretation and enforcement of the specifild regularion wourd iesurt in piicticar airticuriy or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of ttre variance that do not appty generally to other properties in the same zon e.
The strict or riterar interpretation and enforcement of the specified reguration would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same distric t.
STAFF RECOMI{ENDATIONS
A- Setback Variance
The staff recommends approval of the setback variances.These setback encroachments already exist on the property and the applicants are not requesting any further encrtachl
C
aovl|z- 6/10/85
ments.
(Please note that if the PEC decides to approve the two requests, the Town Engineer has requested that the applicant conpLete a revocable right-of-way agreement as the applicanes,fence is on the Town right-of-way adjacent to Bighorn Road. )
B.GRFA Variance
The staff recommends denial of the GRFA variance. This request conflicts with the intent of Ordinance No. 4 which allovs for additj.ons up to 25O square feet. Staff believes that the applicants could work within the allotment of 25O square feet for their addition. The applicants have the opportunity to add 250 square feet either on the third floor or perhaps on the ground .f loor. Staff realizes that setback variances would stiLl be necessary for either type of 250 square foot addiCion. Hovrever, it is felt that by staying within the 250 square feet the intent of the ordinance is upheld and the additional GRFA would not be a grant of special privilege. It also feft that the scale and character of the existing subdivision would tre maintained by this alternative. Staff feels that to approve the GRFA variance request of 395 square feet would be to disregard Ordinance 4 which is designed to provide a streamlined process for property owners who wish to upgrade their units.For these reasonsr staff recommends denial of the GRFA variance reques t.
(
l- i-
(
TI
>l url
--J I
'\$l
I r-l xl <l \$l
{
(L
o
"
7-\
F
{r
t$
'l
t\
I
F J
s
u)
E:
{
-T
tr
.'.
\.J
--J \J]
L
o
\\
=l
(
_\
c
---T
0
\.-.(\
\l
__l \l
-ts I +
l-__]lf----r-it
G-
rg
Request forms nrust
Thursdays.
TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA REQUEST
be given to the Secretary to the Town Manager by 8:00 am
Date: June 24. 1986 Dept.Com Dev Meeting Date:July I , '1986_
Work Session_ Evening x
Sjte visit requested during work session
I . Item/Topi c:
Appeal of the PEC decision to deny a request for a GRFA variance of 395
square feet in order to add a third story addition to a residence on Lot
20-D-l of Bighhorn Terrace. Applicants: Tim Boyle and Debbie Nicholson
I I . Acti on Requested of Counci I :
To decide if the PEC decision should be upheld or overturned.
III.
IV.
Background Rationaie:
The allowable GRFA is 604 square feet. Presently, the GRFA is 748 square
feet. The applicants are requesting to add another 395 square feet which
would create a total GRFA of 1,143 square feet. This request would
result in the GRFA be'i ng 539 square feet over the allowable GRFA. The
staff will count 250 square feet of the total 395 square foot variance
request as a request under Ordinance 4,'l 985 which al'l ows for additions
up to 250 sguare feet. The appiicants are requesting 145 square feet
above the 250 square feet.
Staff Recommendation:
To deny the GRFA request.
V. Assurance ( Legal,
Professional
Engineering,Fi nance,0utsi de
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Cornmission of the
Town of Vail will hold a public heali ng in accordance with Section 18.66.060
of the municipal code of the Town of Vail on June 23, .1986 at 3:00 P.M' in
the council chambers in the Vail municipal buildjng.
Consideration of:
1. A request for a GRFA variance of 395 square feet in order to add a
third story addition to a residence on Lot 20-D-l of Bighorn Terrace
Subdivision at 4277 Columbine Road.
Applicants: Tim Boyle and Debbie Nicho'l son
2. A request for a conditional use permit in order to place a satellite
banking facility in the Mill Creek Court Bujlding at 302 Hanson Ranch
Road.
Appl i cant: Vaj I Nati onal Bank
The applications and information about the proposals are avai'l able in the
zoning administrator's office during regular office hours for public
i nspecti on.
T0l,lN 0F VAIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
THOMAS A. BRAUN
Zoning Administrator
Pub'l i shed in the Va'i I Trai I June 6, .l986.
b /4 '8a2
{e'yIz Fg"1+J r tJ (ZtTz
frurt eft r{*tt- 3akft
€e,. tu{Lr/t-I (.F(-/ao A RDqa/ o r)
WA&- l&tsTt tJ .
I wt=t{ {o w-- Tk6
?txp tJlkJ4 laf'l t,l ts6 (o,*J's I>91a1eL oF ouK ee.eL(€€T pQ A AK-tr* Vn&t€11 G, PE oq<
??*Fosg> APDtTtoFr h( bT
ao-t> /.&/qtb&J T4e4.e {*1cz
&to€-+po nEA=# <+-iqztLg #le ktr*E @g Ar aan4 a2vL>atL Mrcffd q A< #or{
b+ ?*=lDt-L,
f,*pk yottt
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
June 23, 1986
COMMISSION
PRESENT
Diana Donovan
Bryan Hobbs
Pam Hopkins
Peggy Osterfoss
Duane Piper
Sid Schultz
Jim V.iele
STAFF PRESENT
Peter Patten
Kristan Pritz
R i ck Py'l man
Betsy Rosolack
Ar uest for a GRFA variance of 395
s!o r ti on to a residence on
d a third
Kristan Pritz explained the request and showed the site plan and also the elevations of the new.and the previous proposal one year ago. lhe stated that one.year ago the appl icants came before the pEC with a request for setback variances and with the same request for a GRFA varjance. The pEC granted the setback variances and denied the GRFA variance. In the current request, the exterior-design of the third level had been changed, but the f1 oor plan and the .amount of GRFA variance being requested were identical to the request one year ago. She reviewed the memo, stating that the staff felt that it would be i grant.of special privilege to approve the request because the applicants could upgrade their unit within the 250 square foot limit of 0rdjnance'4 of .|996.
Tim Boyle, one of the applicants, stated that the reason he came back to the
PEC was because 'last year he did not take advantage of the opportunity to appeal the decision of denial to the Town Council. He stated'that 25-0 sguare feet was tough to work with. He added that since the roof leaks, he could correct the leak at the same time that he added a third floor.
Viele pointed out that the PEC and Council had al 1 agonized over the amount of
GRFA to be p'l aced in 0rdinance 4. He felt that it was a policy issue and precedent. setting. Hobbs and 0sterfoss agreed with viele, piper added that
much deliberat'ion had gone into establishing some means for upgrading units and
some ljmjts to that ordjnance, and that jt was not a slam dunk-ttringi piper
fe] t that if the request were granted, more landscaping should be added to the project. Pritz pointed out that this would be dealt with in DRB.
Patten stated that if the request had been for 250 square feet or'l ess, the request would have gone straight to DRB, not to the pEC. Donovan felt there should be more landscaping and that the phone wires were dangerous. she felt this request should go to the Council to be reviewed. Donovin felt this des.i gn
was better and landscaping would help to scale the bujld.i ng down
viele moved and Osterfoss seconded to deny the request per the staff memo. The vote was 7-0 for denial
e feet in order
:0:l qf Bighorn Tenrace.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
mof, l on wa
4il 60q The GRFA al'l owable for this unit 4v.+{8 square feet. The appljcants are
Town Counci I
Community Development Department
July l, .l986
Appeal of P'l anning and Environmental Commissjon's decision to deny
request for a GRFA vari ance of 395 square feet in order to add a third story addition to a residence on Lot 20-D-l of Bighorn
Terrace. Appl icants: Tim Boyle and Debbie Nicholson
0n June 23,1986 !l anni ng and Envil n voted to den
app errace.The
Add, flt
lrlD t t,lf
create a third floor which would
request would result in the GRFA
The staff is counting 250 square
request under Ordinance 4. .|985
gy Osterfoss.The
square feet. Presently the GRFA is 748
reguesting to add another 395 square feet to
create a total GRFA of .l,143 square feet. This
being 539 square feet over the allowable GRFA.
feet of the total 395 square foot variance as a
which allows for additions up to 250 square feet.
the request, as it was felt that the proposal did
4 and would also be considered a grant of special
4q lFt3 The staff recommended denial of
.-{q not meet the intent of 0rdinance
offJlo.bhl{.rvr Iese'
The P'l anning and Environmental Commission made the following comments about the
request:
1
e+'f'1'
\ )t1 /l
! -,/'11 "
?.
Piper.felt.that,Ordilanie 4, should be upheld, as the-staff; PEC, and
CouiiTlT-hE'cl-3tltfied rn oepcn Ene uKfA rsile. The 250 square foot figure
was arrived at by analyzing previous GRFA requests and determining an
appropriate amount of GRFA.
q*
Donovan fel t that the var.l ance was definitely a decision for the Counci I
lPersonal 1y,she theti c to fel t tha a
Counc iI \r d
J.
4.
Donovan also mentioned that additions that have occurred in Biqhorn Terrace
L..,^L^.l.^,l+^l^.^-|..'-}L^L^.,.'|:t.--.:-:.-.|-!-...r-....-
------r .---------
va trlan1.ce--reqlest
Donovan and Piper felt that additional
property if the third story addition is
The telephone wire that crosses the top
so that there is not a problem when the
ond the 250 s re
'| s co u raqes A
landscaping is needed on the
approved.
of the bujlding should be studied
addition is constructed.
detai I the variance reouest.
Vjele stated that,
the tools to review feet. It was felt
qiven Ordinance 4.- r r t ',requesls wnt cn asK
that the ordinance
the Pl anni ng Commi ss ion does n0r have
f
5.
6.
t to their unit
hel ped break
varl ance.
Please see the enclosed memo which exolains in
C
the th'i rd Ievel has
6OVa-/!ot. The enclosed memo from June .1985 shows a table of statistics for this
iu1y.au. property. The GRFA allowable for this unit js 604 c1'ero fcet.
: :"_-i, Presently, the GRFA js 748 square feet. The appl icants are requestin - Presently, the GRFA is 748,squarF,fFet. -lh" appl icants are requesting
|qf did' to add aiotner_ags ,qu"-."-."._wnrcn wouro maKe a tot4L-l3BEA-.1#J,j
Nf*il,gt;ffijJi:;il;:.i'j::1:;,::;ilH;.ol:i;J:"
r/{S tUa 4, 1985, which allows for additions up to 250 square feet. The ffi Mr^s+fl:' l;i:n :;"1:lx:;::'; 1:u.:o:lli.l!"in?!'l;o:n:,':3,::l?[ iff'dwelling units which have been located within the Town of vail at least f ive years.
II. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
]o'
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Planning and Environmental Commissjon
Community Devel opment Department
June 23, .l986
A request for a density variance of 395 square feet.i n order to
add a third story addition to a residence on Lot 20-D-l of Bighorn
Terrace Subdivision at 4277 Columbine Road.
Appl icants: Tim Boyle and Debbie Nicholson
DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUESTED nOnp
with the same reguest for a GRFA density variance. The-E}-anaing
commission granted the earhasl,. va'.irnrce end rrenied the GRFA vaiiance.
s TFom that meeting indicate that the reason or the that it would have been
sreclar . Seri es of .|985 which was intended to allori
I.
The applicants wish to add a third story to their two story single
fami1y residence. In order to construct this addition, a GRFA variance of 395 sgualg fegt iLleerted. rl_49-gl_1,99fu the applicants came oerore Ene ptanntng commlsslon with a request for setback variances and
home owners to apply for to upgrade their homes.
than 250 square feet of additional GRFA
nt u
no more
In the
Upqn rgyieW of 9riteriq gnd Findings. gection .l8.62.060 of the Munjcipal code. the Depa.tment of community Developr"nt recomm"ndslEnjarlFJlil
;r-
q }?i
'T1
Consi deration of Factors:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existinq or potential
uses and structures in the vicinitv.
ear out of character
A third slgrv woufd somewhat impact the neighborjo the south. In general ,units in Bighorn Terrace arE-on-fitwo-Stories. The new third story wi1l
'l mpac rom rne story are minor due to the
unit.
\LIli-rcU. HoWeVer, Ene
location of the windows and
views in the adjacent
The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compalibi I ity
and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attajn the
objectives of this tjtle without grant of special privilege.
The staff feels that it would be a grant of special privjlege to approve this
GRFA variance. The enclosed memo from June 1985 gives a history of Bighorn
Terrace variance requests. This table indicates that approving the GRFA
variance would be a grant of special privilege due to the large amount of
GRFA. Ther sts for a f recommen
approval -o onl one in .|977
n ty f,wo reques for an amount greater than I so ua re
n
.l978 e feet
variance would be
wi th other reouests that have been upon within Bighorn
, rl More importantly, staff feels that this request disregards Ordinance No. 4
hr& \ which was intended to address upgrading of existing homes by a1 lowing smal vt GRFA additions for site improvement trade offs. The PEC and Town CounciI
worked for over a year to wri te an ordinance that would allow small scale
'improvements to occur to older residences without allowjng an excessive
amount of additional mass or bulk. The ordinance specifical 1y states:
.|8.7.| .0.l0 Purpose
square feet.
i nconsi stent
Te r race .
Staff be eves that to approve t is GRFA
acted
"The purpose
upgrading of
have been i n
l east 5 years
of
of this chapter is to provide an inducement for
'i ndividual dwelIing units in cerain structures
existence withjn the Town of Vail for a period
ng un . Proposal s
the
whi ch
of at
by permitting the addition of up to 250 square t
r
:.tructugs. .,.
c I ose ry wl En respect to si ies,
an dar
It should be noted that the applicants were made aware of the opportunity to
add an additional 250 square feet of GRFA under this ordinance. However, the
appl icants chose not to pursue their request under this process,
Boyl e 6/23/85 -2-
e
Staff believes that applicants'desire to upgrade their unit can be achieved
within the 250 square foot Iimit.
The effect of the requested variance on l'i ght and air. djstribution of
population. transportation and traffic facilities, public facjl itjes and utilities. and public safety.
amount of liqht and ai
rI
III.FINDINGS
The P'l anning and Environmental Commjssion shall make the following findings
before granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of specia1 privilege inconsistent with the I imjtatjons on other properties classified in
the same district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to propertjes or
improvements in the vicinity.
That the vari ance is warranted for one or more of the folIowinq reasons:
The str i ct or l i tena l i nterpretat i on and enforcement of the speci fi ed
regulation would result jn practical difficulty or unnecessary physical
hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
There are exceptions or extraord inary ci rcumstances or conditions
applicable to the sjte of the variance that do not apply general 1y to
other properties in the same zone.
The strict or litera'l interpretation and enforcement of the specified
regulation would deprive the appl icant of privileges enjoyed by the
owners of other properties in the same district.
Such other factors and cri teria as the commission deems applicable to the
proposeo var 1 an ce
Boyl e 6/?3/85 -3-
t
tl,lv.STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Jhe staff recommends denial of the GRFA vari ance. This request conflicts aTtiis for additions of up to 250
square feet. Staff believes that the applicants could work withjn the
allotment of 250 square feet for their addition. The applicants have the
opportunity to add 250 square feet either on the third floor or perhaps on the ground floor. Staff realizes that setback variances would be necessary for an addition on the ground floor. However, it is felt that by staying within the 250 square feet, the intent of the ordinance is upheld and the additional GRFA would not be a grant of special privilege. It also is felt that the scale and character of the existing subdivision would be maintained
by thjs alternative.at to approve the GRFA variance request of 395 square feet would be to disregaxk=F?lTffET?E
lilnphou L|,),'rt5-,
r
4dl,rltt,s nr( brto t'tu fldl'rfiu^S Ar( bYYr LuAq
)udtrof,y MaAl''Ur
fnah'm
9La{Yl,
S*', )rd \"
roperly owners
r haiJ
-lS &tnY
7-0
tlnl haw-fr{l
flup-d
Boyle 6/23/85 -4-
r
Boy'le -q- a/10e
vicin gr to attain the obiectives of this title nithout qrant
oE special privilege-
A.Setback Varianceg
B.
Aug
Aug
Aug
\en R2
llov 83
Feb ll
Beny s h
Rowe
Alder
I urnDu | |
Curfman
0dum
0dum
Houston
Sherr
REQUEST
GRFA
Setback
GRFA
Setback
GRFA
Setbac k
Setback
GRFA
GRFA
Setback
Setback for
Airl ock
GRFA
Setback
AI'IOUNT OF
VARIANCE
I a f +
(hrg
lb rt
Approval
Approval
Denial
Denial
Deni al
Den i al
Approval
Denial
Deni al
Approva i
Approval
Denial
Den i al
Denial
App rova I
PEC
ACT I ON
Approval
App rova I
Approva
App rov a
Approval
Approval
Approvai
Approva)
Tabl e
Approval
App rov a I
App roval
Approva I
App rova 1
Staff feels that due to the existing buildingr it would not be a special privilege to grant the variances for setbacks as the setback encroachments wj. ll not be any greater than those existing encroa c hments.
GRFA Variance
Staff feels that it would be a grant of special privilege
to approve this GRFA variance. The following chart shows variance requests in Bighorn Terrace have been approved:
VARIANCE REQUEST HISTORY OF BIGHORN TERRACE SUBDIVISION
TYPE OF DATE APPL I CANT STT.F F
R ICOiIi"IEI,JDAT I ON
+ Mar
Mr^x
lAfld3f,
{l!
77
78
78
BO
82
7r-
t6
GRFA 50 so ft
3 Setbacks g,t t--&-T3.Tt
The chart indicates that approving the setback variances woul_d not be a grant of special privilege. Howeverr i E does show that. approving the GRFA variance woul-d be a grant of special privilege due to the large amount of GRFA. There have been r3 requests for additional GRFA. The staff recommended approval
Thg degree to uhigh relief Frgn the slfict or literalE!"rpr.t tiot
conpatibilty and unifornity of treatment anonq sitesin trre
,,Bovlf3- 6/10/s5
considerabl-y more attractive than the mansard roof "box'.which is presently on the site. As many other residents of Bighorn Terrace have been granted variances to improve their propertiesl r feer that r have a right to enjoy tn"same privilege. The proposed addition wirr be approxi*-u.t"ry 4o0 square feet. r do not feer that the granting of thii variance will affect the lightr airr distribution of popuLation,transportationr trafficr utiLities or public Jafety in the area- The increased height of the building witi not have a detrimentar effect on the two neighborsr as neither have a view or sun corridor through this vo]ume; trees tarLer than the proposed addition exist on two sides of the houser between our house and the two neighbors noted above- The residents across the streets are in taLler bui]dings than the proposed new rever and should not be affected by this addition. In shortr f feel that relief from the strict interpretation of the GRFA requirement is necessary in this case if r am to receive equal treatment as a number of ot.her sites in my vicinity.,,
CRITERTA AND FINDINGS
Witeria and Find
l{t Co-g.itv .o"J.Iopr"rrt .".o-".r.i-approval. of the se tbac
GRrA variance based upo@
Consideration of Factors:
Tne rgla.tignship of- tqe rgquested variance to other existing or potential- uses and structq.g" @
t
A.
B.
Setback Yariances
The requested setback variances presently exist. The application is for a third story on a structure that is already eniroaching on aL1 four sides into the required setback iestrictions.The encroachments due to the addition should not substan-tiallyimpact adjacent units/ as the setback encroachments already exist.
GRFA Variance
A third story wour-d somewhat impact the neighbor to the south. The units in Bighorn Terrace are on smaIl lots with the result that ther,e is not much space between buildings.In generalT units in Bighorn rerrace ire only two stories.The new thiral story wirr. appear out of character with the rest of the subdivision. HoweverT the impacts from the third story are negJ.igible due to the locaiion of adjacent units' windows and -views.
FePYJoe? l\t\lr6z-
East Elevation
1/4":1'-O"
Aq;flaFl
loa)
North Eldvation
1/4"
South Elevation
t..
I
7/4":1'-O"
_-__+"tq.bl
Ar;r)noA
rl _{D tbaz
--4 a,6
fu>uooo AlAbt4
Elevation
1/4":1'4
-o IT l-
-a o
Jr ul
ril J
a'tr E
-F
,o rl
a /.u al xr
I
I
I
bJ
'.n
t)
F J
T.L a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I ,I
A \
\l t
dl
z l4
o O)o ,
\I lr
I
\$\
\\\
\-
r{la)lul lr
r.\
+
o z a o l!
I IJ ld iJ o.;t lq,
i t/t
I
i
j
t
I
I
h,
U z l!E
o
iJ
€
F lf\
$
f-
ll
i
i
1
I
o
I
N
F
J
Ll
t.\-
;
lc.k-a
I F
0_
c4.il
I lr
'1 l I
*l
Itt l-or l+lr,| (,4
+
7n +r u,0),^^ Y liv (L >N q q oF n
(r)Y
IrJ ll- r.t c.o S_--+
6
N
\5 ll 1tl ?;l :t I Ei i \tll >ti oi I ll rril 0ll oi b. l
>:
li
)l
\r\
I
I
I
I
i
l,ol
{
]
t-
;
to..
tf..
Z
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LL
R t\'\
t\l\i\
r !.1
I\J lz tH *o
lo lc
{/\-^ |rl lr I ,-* -Y R- ,9'
t(
P9 (/') \-.,
o:)
='_F
u,z
1
Io
J
o
ri
(
t-l \l >l ql
"rl FI ol {l \$l
(
o ;
_s
z
\)
F {-
\n
u\
I F
=\
\l)
C
U" -t- 6/10/8s
ments.
(Please note that if the pEC decides to approve the two requestsl the Tohrn Engineer has requested that the applicant compl-ete a revocable right-of-way agreement as the applicants,fence is on the Town right-of-way adjacent to Bighoin Road. )
B.GRFA Variance
{
The staff recommends deniaf of the GRFA variance. This request confricts with the intent of ordinance No. 4 which arlows for additions up to 250 square feet. staff beLieves that the applicants couLd work within the allotment of 25O squ6r'e feet tor their addition. The applicants have the opportunity to add 25O square feet either on the third floor or perhaps on the ground .f r-oor. staff realizes tha t setback variances would still be necessary for either type of 250 sguare foot addition. However, it is feLt that by staying within the 25O square feet the intent of the ordinance is upherd and the additionar GRFA would not be a grant of special privilege. ft also felt that the scale and character of the existing subdivision would be rnaintained by this alternative- Staff feel-s that to approve the GRFA variance request of 395 square feet would be to disregard Ordinance 4 which is designed to provide a streamlined process for property ovners who wish to upgrade their units.For these reasonsr staff recommends denial of the GRFA variance reques t.
{
{
-T
\'f
g
\-l
-J xt
i
L_l
,nl
\JI fl
(
-J_
.::
L
---T
O
tr
\l I \l
,i Fi
-t ;,\ I ii L'
*l
I
I
I
---'
o
:
t-+r
L::....'-
Io-is yue^olo0L ilolig " tl{r*t ),tD$
ir oufiib0a- ar d Uidt dftl- 6Pr{ rLt
w,rr\ oo pr{ibh
arr [: :$,{r\ hdo,e ()rJ ,.1 \D\L L^lrri Uan',o/rts0
00dil, !L {w11so*l'- +I,o hao ilrW
\@r\ +\o- ri{uo*i[,v low *nq.ra1
dDei $\ r\olrro. rr{Anr ft uU/XN. \pR*
\oo\ otpd. t\rw. +D 0t { .-t
$XH%+W r-c,Nrrdo^Dq
o
g--'t: '
IO:
FROI{:
DATE:
Planning and Environmental Commission
Community DevelopDent Department
ilune lO, 1985
SUB.IECI: Reguest for sider front and rear setbackg and for a cRpA variance of 395 square feet in order to add a third story addition to a residence on Lot 2O_D_r of Bighorn rerrace subdivision at 4277 colunbine Road. Applicants: Tin Boyle and Debbie Nicholgon
DESCRIPTION OF VARIAT{CE REQUESTED
The applicants wish to add a third story, including a clerestory to their tvo story singre famiry residence. rn order to construct this additionr a GRFA variance of 395 square feet and setback variances are needed. The following tabie shows the GRFA and variance statistics for this property:
Zone. Medium Density Multiple-Family Lot Areaz 1724 sf
GRFA:
Existing:748 sf AlLowed: 604 sf
Va r ia nce Proposed: 395 sf
TotaI with variance: 1r143 sf
Total amount over aLlowabLe: 539.4 sf with addition
Setbacks Required: 2O feet on a.}l sides Setbacks Existing: O feet north side 9.7 feet on south side 19.2 feet on east side 12.1 feet on west side
Parking:Required: 2 spaces,/5OO to 2,OOO sf of GRFA.Presently the site has one parking space. The parking is considered to be a legal non-conforming situ-ation.This request does not increase the GRFA beyond 2;OOO sf which would necessitate an additional parking space.Thereforer th€ legal non-conforming situatlon is adequate for the addition.
BovleJ 6/10/85
He ight:Linit is 35 feet for a fLat roofr 38 feet for a stoping roof. Request is for 33 feet.
The GRFA allowabte for this unit is 6o4 square feet. presentlyr
the GRPA is 748 square feet. The applicants are requesting to add another 395 square feet which woufd make a total GRFA of Lr143 square feet. This request wourd result in the GRFA being 539 square feet over the aLJ.owabl-e GRFA. The staff HiLL count 25o square feet of the totaL 395 square foot variance as a request under ordinance 4 which a110ws for additions up Eo 25o square feet. The intent of ordinance 4 is to addresi this type of upgrading for dwerring units which have been located within the Town of Vail at least five years. rf ordinance 4 were not applied to this requestr the appiicants would be able to add another 25o square feet in the future. For this reasonr it is important to i.ncorporate the GRrA request under ordinance 4.
Because of the smaLL size of the Lots in Bighorn Terrace r the exi-qting building encroaches into the required 20 foot frontl sider and rear setbacks. This unit encfoaches 20 feet on the northr lO.3 feet on the southr 7.9 feet on the west and O.g feet on the east side. The proposed addition wif.t. be located on top of the existing structure. The addition wi]l not encroach any further into the 2o foot setbacks than does the existing unit. The same setback encroachments are being requested foi the third floor addition. (please see site plan. )
The following is the appticant.s request:
"The purpose of this ]etter is to request a GRFA variance for a proposed addition to my residence at 427 7 Columbine Drive. The addition will_ consist of an additional story on top of the existing two story structure. As such, i will not be approaching any set-backs nor wirL r be increasing the footprint of the building. f intend to hold the new ridge ot the buirding ber-ow the 33' height restriction;so again no variance will be required on that point. As you are aware, Bighorn Terrace is composed of a number of smaLl single family and duplex residences on extremely smal-1 sites- Many of the owners in this subdivision have done additions to their residences, typically adding on to the perimeter of the buildings. Due to the postage stamp size of our 1ot, I feel that an addition upwara will have. less impact on the site and the nei.ghborhood than a perimeter addition. AIso the flat roof design of this earl.y va i-L home has caused us numerous problems with Leaks that have to be addressed by creating a slope on the existing building. By going up with the additionr I wilL basicat_1y be solving the roof problem and creating additional spacL at the same time. PresentJ.y the home has two smalr bedrooms and one snBll bath which make it nearly impossible to consider having a family. I intend the finished buililing to be
{t
t.
Bovle -f/10/8s
of only one in 1977 for 13O square feetr and recommended denial of the others. only two requests were for an amount. greater than l3O square feetr that of Rowe in 1978 and Cuffman in I980.(Rowe is Boyle's neighbor to the south. ) Statf belreves thac to approve this GRFA variance would be inconsistent with other requests that have been granted in Bighorn Terrace. More irnpor-t.antlyr staff feels that this request disregards Ordinance No. 4 which vas intended to address upgrading of existing homes.the PEC and Town Council have lrorked for over a year to urite an ordinance tha t wouLd allow home owners to apply for no more than 25O square feet of additional GRFA in order to upgrade their homes. The ordinance specifically states:
18.7I.01O purpose
The purpose ot this chapter is to provide an inducement
for the upgrading of indiv.idua.L dwelling units in
certain structures vhich have been in existence within the Town of Vail for a perriod of at least 5 years by permitting the addition of up to 25O square feel of gross residential floor area to dwelling units in said structures.... Proposa.l,s f or any additions shal1 be reviewed closely with respect to site plansr impact on adjacent propertiesr and applicable
Town of Vail development standards. "
It should be noted that Ehe applicants were made aware of the opportunity to add an additionaJ. 25O square feet of GRFA under this ordinance- Howeverl the appl j.cants chose not to pursue
their requesL under this process. The GRFA variance request is 145 square feet over the 25O square feet allowed under Ordinance 4- A greaL amount of work hrent into Ordinance 4 to insure that the amount of GRFA that could be added r^rould be adequate for upgrade additions and that the additional GRFA would not be such a large amount that it wouLd detract from the property.
To grant the GRFA variance of 395 square feet would go against the intent of Ordinance 4. The 25O square foot figure lra s arrived at by a great deal of discussion and research. Staff believes that this figure is not arbitraryr dod that the applicants'desire to upgrade their unit can be achieved vithin the 25O square foot I imi t.
The effect of the ..que"t.d v,ariarc.
facilities and utjfitiesrand pubfi
t* a*ra at"* addition will decrease slightly the amount of light and air between the Boyle's unit and the unit to the south.It. is felt that the third floor addition is not particularly
in character and scale with the rest of the subdivision. Howeverr the struct.ure wil-I be within the MDI'IF height requirement if the third floor is added.
{
lle -6- 6/10/85
{Related Polices in Vailrs Conuuni Action Plan
Under the headingr "Community Design" No. 2 states:
"Upgrading and remodeling of structures and site improvements should be e nc oura ge d.
- Stimulate conmunity awareness
- Incentives"
Staff encourages upgrades.
must be adressed.
Hovever , zoning/ variance criteria
Fuclrjther facEors ?nd criteria as the coromission deens appricable
EO Cne proposed varr_ance.
I
I
FINDTNGS
T_he _P.lanni_ng.and Environnental comnission shalr uake ther follosinq findings before grantinq a variance:
That the granting of the var j.ance wiII not consitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties cLassified in the same district.
That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safetyr or w€lfarer or materially injurious to proerties or improvements in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the followi.ng
rea son s :
The stric_t or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation woufd result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zon e.
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation woul,d deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district.
STAFF RECOUUENDATIONS
Setback Variance
The staff recommends approval of the setback variances.
These setback encroachments already exist on the property and the applicants are not requesting any further encroach-
A.
N'q ${%sN
otd%S
TO:
FROH3
DATE:
GRFA:
Exi sting:
Allowed:
Va r ia nce
Proposed:
748 sf
6O4 sf
395 sf
0'd,'{
A5D
\\5
$rdfi
et^
Planning and Environmental Commission
Conmuni ty Development De;nrtnent
June lO, 1985
suErEcr: Requeat for gider front and rear setbacks and for a GRFA variance of 395 aquare feet in order to add a third story addition to a reaidence on Lot 2O-D-I of Bighorn Terrace Subdivision at 4277 Columbine Road. Appli.cants: Tin Boyle and Debbie Nicholgon
DESqBTPTION OF VARIANCE REOUESTEp
The app]"icants wish to add a thr.rd story, including a clerestory to their t"ro story single family residence. rn order to conscruct this additionr a GRFA variance of 395 square feet and setback variances are needed. lhe following tabfe shows the GRFA and variance statistics for this property:
Zone: Medium Density Multiple-Family Lot Area: 1724 sf
,9
Total r.rith variance: I,143 sf
Total imount over allowable: 539.4 sf with addition
,r ^,VJ Setbacks Required:-\\ rx r-|.(0aut^-_,, Se tbacks Ex isting:
Pa rk i ng:
20 feet on afl sides
O feet north side 9.7 feet on south side 19.2 feet on east side 12.1 feet on west side
Required: 2 spaces,/500 to 2,000 sf of GRFA Presently the site has one parking space. The parking is cons j.dered to be a legaI non-conforming situation.This request does not increase the GRFA beyond 2rOOO sf which woul-d necessitate an additional parking space.Therefore, the legaJ. non-conforming situatlon is adequate for the addition.
1$-$
MAhl $r lr $ol, 5K l@
Bovte -f/io/ss
#,
Heig\:Limit is 35 feet for a fl_at roofr 38 feet for sloping roof. Request is for 33 feet.
The GRFA all'oroable for this unit is 6O4 square t. Presentlyr the GRFA is 748'square feet. The appliiantV/are requesting to add another 3'9{ square feet r,rhi c^n' woutd,,'ma ke a totaL GRFA of l,rJ.43 square feb.q. This request woul{resutt in the GRFA being 2-3{ square f eeL.. over the alto count Qp square f eet of t.he total I
count as a request under Ord j.nance 4 wh
i t is importan t to incqt porat.e the
GRFA. The staff will square foot variance lows for additlons uD
fu ture. For thi s reason r
GRFA request under Ordi nance
to 25O square feet. The ihtent Ordinance 4 is to addres s this type of upgrading for dveJ-J-;ig units which have been located within the Town of vail aL r,{ast five years. rf ordinance 4 were not appJ-ied to this 9y'quest, the appJ-icants woul-d be able to add another 25O square p6et in Ehe
N
4.
Because of the
existing buildi Vp6 lI size of the Lots in Bighorn Terracer the encroaches into the required 20 foot frontr sidel and re setbacks. Th-i s rrni t cncroaches 2O f,eet on the
. q-qE
fee t
on top the existing structure. The addition will not encroach rther into the 2O foot setbacks than does the ext-stinq The same setback encroachments are being reques\ed foi
!eet on tha so'rLh, 'i'-9 f-e e_t On the nest and O.8 eest qide. The proposed aAdiLi.on wirr 6J-focaiEa-
The same setback encroachments are being reques the third flqor addition.(Please see site pla
- Aoo0ira,r"x The follPting is the applicant's reques
any
uni t.
IY
"The purpose of this l-etter is to request a-G{f.a variance for a proposed addition to my residence at 427 7 Columbine Drive. The addition will consist of an additional story on top of the existing two story structure. As suchr i will not be approaching any set-backs nor wirl r be increasinq t.he footprint of the building. I intend to hold the ne .7 ridge ot the buiLdinq be.Low the
ddi t ion C f Iat roof design of this early VaiI h ome as
at the same time. Present.Ly the home has two sma 1l bedrooms and one small bath which make it nearly impossible to consider having a fami Iy. I intend the finished building to be
Also
cau s ed
the
us nu
e ex1*-!gg
o-ftu*
ffi#
B.
,3rl"Ft
d\d.ode^
Bovte -$ lrcles
considerably more a ttrac t ive than the mansard ro of
which is presen@ esidents
6Erace have been-granted variances to improve
t
s,a me orivil-eoe. The proposed addition will be approximately
4OO square feet. I do not feel that the granting of this
variance wiIl affect the lightr ai.rr distribution of populationr
transportationr trafficr utilities or public safety in
the area. The increased height of the buildi._q_S will .]qq.t
have a detrimerrtfi-F eithei
tdTlEE-fiia5'-Etre proposed a ddi t ion
the house, between our house and
above. Th ts across Ehe st
b the Droposed new levef and s
affected b D ShOE E r eel" that relief
ct interpretation
this case if I am
oeher sites in my
rees
exist on tuo sides of
the two neighbors noted
are in t
be
of the GRFA requirement
to receive equal trea tment
vicinity. "
f rom
t s necessa rv
as a number
tr i
i^
of
CRITERIA AIID FINDINGS
Upon revieu of Criteria and Findingsr Section 18.62.O6O of the
ltunicipal Coder the Department of Compuni ty Development reco@nd€
iJnces and denial of the requested
GRFA variance based upon the folloving factors:
Consideration of Factors:(wtttuotfuTwtf,L orFJ
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing
or potential uses and structures in the vicinitv-
A.Setback Yarianceg
fhe requested setback vari.ances presently exist. The application
is for a third story on a structure that is already encroaching
on aII four sides into the required setback restrictions.
The encroachments due to the addition shouLd n o t-9@-
tiallyimpact adiacent unitsr as the setback encroachments
GRFA Variance ,"1a,-\r "#thUQ
.D.l -{o^"^ t0 A third story would somewhat impact the ne j.ghbor to the
.bilhfllY-'* south. The units in Bighorn Terrace are on smail Iots wi th
)*r^$lli1pl5' the result that there is not much space between buildings.
e new
est of the subdivision. 11 owever, tha lmpar-ts from the
le due--!9-!f,e--!stetion of adlacent
units' w]-ndows ano v]. ews.
Boyle -a- 61to/)
The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpreti_tion
and enforcen"trt of " "p""ifi"d ."gtf"tid
comDatibifty and uniformity of treatment amonq sites in the
or to attain ctives of this title without qrant
of spec I privilege.
Setback Variances
B.
Staff feeLs that. due to the existing buildingr it would
not be a special privilege to grant the variances for setbacks
as the setback encroachments will, not be any greater than
those existing encroac hments.
GRFA Yariance
Staff feels that it would be
to approve this GRFA variance.
variance requests in Bighorn
VARIANCE RTQUEST HISTORY OF BIGHORN TERRACE SUBDlVISION
AiIOUNT OF STT.FF PEC
ATE APPL I CANT
TYPE OF
REOUE ST VAR l ANCE RECOi'ii'IEiiDATION ACT]ON
a grant of special privilege
The following chart shows
Terracq, fave been approved:
Itr rt
D \<
olt l',iar 7 7
l4ay 78
July 78
Aug 78
Benysh
Rowe
Al der
Turnbul I
GRFA
Setback
bKTA
Setbac k
Setback
,/\ qn lT
a ff
I tv
GRFA
Setback
Setback for
Ai rl ock
GRFA
Setback
122 sq ft
lB ft
lB ft
)Y r r.
I.b TI
The chart indicates that approving the setback variances woufd
not be a grant of special privilege. H owel-er, i t does show
that aFFroving tho GRFA wa lianc'p would be a grant of speciaf
privilege due to the larqe amc''r'rt of cPE^. There have been
l3 requests for additional- GRFA. The staff recommended approval
I s'l'q{,Nf* o{lorgq \tB .PJ.^-i.
KTt*.t, msrfrr,,r$ "[ftffi- u*krrar,e*ir"-r l,ex oe \3D u I)?, w''
Aug 82
Sep BZ
Nov 83
Feb 1l
0dum
0dum
Hou ston
She rr GRFA 50 sq ft
3 Setbacks 3,.l.l, & l3 ft
Den i ai
uentar
App roval
Den ial
Approvai
App ro va 1
Den.i al
uenrat
Deni al
Approval
Approval
Approval
App ro v a1
laD te
Approval
App rova 1
App roval
Approvai
Approva i
o o
!
.J
F ,l
<-
\$
o .-
:g
T.\
F
u\
-]\d
I
F l q
o
-7_
e
E
..,.'
\\J I
Ltj \l xt tj )l \ll ll
-s il \
o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-r\\\\s
s
I
I
I .-+
i
1
I
l
i t*tr-L l._-.+
t--\?-
l-__-:
--1J+
' --T
e i-<tr tl
T
--T
e
l-\--l
$\l
-lr \ll ,t
FI
nl zl
t-
F
l-
tK i /F)I
^r--I-l t/ Ltl
4
,
//
l-l-/llt'-
_-J-jt l -l
t l-l
---_-,7
-t- I
--' I
-.,]|
i'.-1--,
|
- -i--{:F- L t l_r--'---
ii-F+f---J
I .-,- |
| -- !- -l f-- !*J F_*J
l-' ! -l !-A | ;---:-1 --- _.!-l
i-l j_- __l
L-'---.1 -,_,__JJ
__ r-.l
A.*-J \r:-*l u-=1
\Yl (\:l
\l ,-:- 1-=-'
Bovle | 6/10/s5
,r* e* pwb*{
fi i r."".?:"., r " *t; h', *fli;"ffi ,'o"i' ; "" :i ;; ; T:::il,o"in i * Mffi /l:o square_feetr that of Rowe in 1978 for 473 =quate feet. trfr&[-(Rowe is Boy]e's neighbor to the south.) staff beLieves that to approve this GRFA variance vould be i.nconsistent with othe
Town of Vail- development standards.
-f r t shouLd be noted that the appricants \"rere made ar.rare of the
l opportunity to add an additional 25o square feet of GRFA under
It-hi: ordinance. However, the applicants chose not to pursue
[:h"]:_ request under this process. The cRFA variance request \trs 145 square feet over the 250 square feet arLowed under ordinance 4-A mount of work went into Ordinance 4 the amount of G cou be ded cl ua te for
u Fq'ra cle adcl 1t10 at the additional cRFA woul.d
6 om the proper ty.
that this f igure @r and that desire to upgradg-Eheir unit can be achieved
The effect the r
of ula t on
requests that have been granted in Bighorn Terrace. More impor-tantLyr staff feels that this request disregards ordinance ut. a
s an
wouLd go aga-Fs t_
figure -was irrivedl Staff believes I
the applicants' I within the 25O I
gdotFJ
Dsq
#,ft
W e T osrn
perm].
gross
sa i d . shal
which was intended to address upgrading of ex isting h ome s.The PEc and Town councir have worked for over a year to wrrte an ordinance that would allow home owners to apply for no more than 25o square feet of additional GRFA in order to upgrade their homes. The ordinance specifically states:
18.71.010 Purpose
The purpose of thrs rovide an i.nduceme nt f
th
by
of
in
rtain s tructures vhich ve been in existence within iod of at least 5 years
of up to 25O square feet
a rea to dweLLinq units
Pro osa 1s for any additions
cab
of Vail for a per
t.ting the addition
residentia L floor structures
li
€\-
t]'m
n*
of ested
)ot
^fl
square f
tibu.ld-!o
it' , n D\ Y"dr
.L be re
nce on trana ortat on and traffic fa
iuikry
A
U varla distribution
€8r PU ac es ano u €E r €r fl c aarreEy.
The third fl"oor addition wiIl decrease slightly the amount of light and air betr.reen the Boyle's unit and the unit Eo the south.
t
th respect to s
-,l-- -Irt is fert that the third fLoor addition is not particul-arlv
/ in character and scale with the rest of the ffi
/ the structure wirl be within the MDtuF heiqht requirement if (-the third floor is added.1gr -
eoo -o- 6/10/85
Related Polices in VaiIrs Comnuni Action Plan
Under the headingr "Community Design" No. 2 states:
"Upgrading and remodeling of structures and site improvements shouLd be encouraqed.
- Stimulate communi ty
- Incentives"
Staff encourages upgrades must be adressed.
awareness
. Holrever, zoning/ variance criteria
such other factors and criteria as the comrnission deens applicabre
FINDINGS
The Planning and Environmental coE4lssion shall .'ake the followi findinqs before grantinq a iariance:
That the granting of the var j.ance wil. I not of special privilege inconsistent with the 1i properties cLassified in the same district.
cons 1tu te a grant
mi ta !ions on other
That the granting of the variance wirr not be detrimental to the public health, safetyr or wel.f arer or materially inSurious to proerties or improvements in the vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following rea 60n s :
The strict or literar interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would resurt in practical di.f f iculty or unnecessary physical" hardshi.p inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or condi ti ons appl icable to the site of the va ria nce that do not appfy generally to other propert j.es in the same zone.
The strict or LiteraI i nterpre ta t i on and enf orcement ot the specified regulation wouLd deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properti.es in the same district-
STAFF RECOT{IIBNDATIONS
A. Setback Variance W^4.
The staff recommends approval of the setback varrances.These setback encroachments already exist on the property and the applicants are not requesting any further encroach-
aovlz- 6/10/85
ments.
(Please note that if the pEC decides to approve the two requestsT the Town Engineer has requested that the appJ_icant compLete a revocable right-of-way agreement as the applicants'fence is on the Town right-of-way adjacent to Bighorn Road. )
B.GRFA Vqrierr"" h,rid!-
The staff recommends deniar of the GRFA variance. This request conflicts with the intent of Ordinance No. 4 which alrows for additions up to 25o square feet. staff believes that the applicants coul-d work within the allotment of 250 square feet for their addition. @ the opportunj.ty to add 250 square f r.'.'r cr perh-ps ou En6 dEffia?loor. star-?-Fearizes thar setback v ssary for either type of 25O square foot addj.tion. However, it is fel.t t by staying within the 250 squa n ten t.
d not be
e scal.e xisting subdivision wou]d be maintained
For ese rea sions ,
(odli* vlN Dd tl - cpp\"tan* c"th wa-L- u'll"i" f,vD?
-D0fi,'10fu qr"/^dJ\04- *'+\,'"J f\a6 adi*' %^404r\ nnl'il - Util (*t^,ir ^* *il\ trc{d{d Ior r-t.],vu' \+z ut
A,SD4adiltio^ , , \,\ \
t-$.ffi- qx"k'ilS+dl' $Fo
.^'
*et- f r r, t,r hz tlo i^tg t,rc&i Lho""&+ u' t'7fltu'ta'+tt^ u/a'L'u
6 +Aan^ &!#/Lu -
V Y , - tt- (ofA, ,,t^,/)-#m
lo aryp,tr<lle qBFA v*ia'urs tDa'./d L4 tb
WI:^^iyi1,'itA *a da;6^td k rp;f;cafl
+ht4 Vf".".:f t t , ,j
by this alternative. Staff feeLs that to approve the GRFA variance request of ril
o o
qgocess-fOf p rope rEy -oFtiEEs i.rhb--v-f
variance reques t.
fx 1l- ,<ao;, ,W fu'^"'^dt &^;"(.
o z
,o lf
^
,,\ / -
, |
^/ ^l
-r-'-|i
\'
\i \l \l dr !-,.,I
lrl
l!I
I ol Ox o,?t I I'\l \i \t
\x \
\i
t!
..t *n
^lt !{t
u)
il
I
Ir 'l \tl 7. 1
{l ej ui
oi
*i XI 0ai
uri 9i 3i
tl \i (i
\l \
I
I
I
I
I
>l
I
I
i
i
I
r-
lJ-r
L
o
tc\lr.
ir
ie
F
tl-.
I
o
I
o \J
F o J
Ll
t.-
;
tcr lc.
a
F
tl-
.c rl
U I tl
I]U J
> ('J L.r
.1
aF n
*.1 Y
V) -1
LrJ u- n
,@ \o
{
\{-- +
6
(.oo F'(l 3r >F -a
)
!J
=t
r.-
'u 6
5
"/t' \l{N
\ c' /A.{f4'
ld l-a It IU l'^..f
L
<1
I I I
n
)
a
Appl ication
PEC MEETING
Date 5-Ib- ga
DATE 6-zz-e
APPLICATiON FOR A VARIANCE
T This
will
A.
procedure is required f9f qn.I project requesting a variance. The appi.i cation not be accepted until al'l information is submitied.
NAME OF APPLICAN ,fiu"-rc+r 14, %vus
ADDRESS 2'7't
,row47 b -21+3
NAME OF APPLICANT,S REPRESENTATIVE 3*T
ADDRESS
PHONE
c.NAME OF O[^JNER(s) (
S i qnat
ADDRESS
ype or
PHONE
D.LOCATION
ADDRESS
OF PROPOSAL
41 Ceu/,RtL
LEGAL DEScRIPTIoN Lot2oQsygg,K FIL i NG
E. FEE $100 PAI D
THE FEE MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTI4ENT WILL ACCEPT YOUR PROPOSAL.
A list of the names of owners of all property
INcLUDING pR0pERTy BEHIND AND AcRoss btnrprs
THE AppLrcANT l,lrLL BE RESpoNSreiE Fon-ioRRici
adjacent to the subject property
and their mailing addresses.
MAILING ADDRESSEs.
II. A PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE l^lITH A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER IS STRONGLY SUGGESTED T0 TDETERMINEIFANY ADDITIoNAL INF0RMATI0N ts ruEroeo.-t'io nppltcnrl0N t,lILL BE AccEPTED UNLESS IT-IS_COMPLFJF (llusr ttcr-uoE nrf-iiiNi-nEQUTRED By rHE z6NrNG lgIlNlIlRAIgE)- IT Is rHE Rppticnrut's nrspoNjierliiV-ro MKE AN AppoTNTMENT WITHTHESTAFFT0FIND0UTAB0UTADDITiolrnrsuaMiiininEquictNenis.
PLEASE N0TE THAT^A^gg+-!IE APPLTCATT0N t.liLL sTREAMLTNE THE AppRoVAL PR0CESS FOR Y0uR PROJEcr BY DECREASING THE NUMBER 0F coNDrrIorus oF-nppnovAL THAT THE pLANNING
AND ENVIRONMENTAL c0MMISSI0N MAY srIPULAii. -nii-Cor'roirions
0F AppR0rlAL MUST BE coMpLIED wrrH BEFoRE A BUILDING pERMIT ls-issffi.--" -' : , , ,
III. FoUR (4) C0prES 0F THE FOLLOI,JrNG MUST BE SUBMITTED:
A. A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE PRECISE NATURE OF THE VARIANCE REQUESTED AND THE REGULATI0N INVOLVED. THE STATEMENT MUST ALs0 ADDRESi,
-' "----
l. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
2' The- degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a-specified regulation is.n"iurti"i io i.ni.u" compatibility and unjformity o{ treatment afrong sites in itre-viiiniti"o" ro attain the objectives of this titre without grant of speciar-p"iuir"gu.
OVER
Vari ance '-2-
3. The effect'of the variance on light and air, d'istribution of population,
transportation, traffic facilities, utilities, and public safety.
B. A topographic and,/or improvement survey at a scale of at least 1" - 20' stamped
by a Colorado licensed surveyor inc'l uding locations of all existing improve-
ments, including grades and elevations. 0ther elements which must be shown
are parking and loading areas, ingress and egress, landscBped areas and utility and drainage features.
C. A site plan at a scale of at least l" = 20' showing ex'isting and proposed
build'ings.
D. A1 I preliminary building elevations and floor plans sufficjent to indicate
the dimensigns, general appearance! scale and use of all buildings and spaces existing and proposed on the site.
E. A preliminary title report to verify.ownership and easements
F. If the proposal is located in a mult'i-family development whjch has a homeowi,ers'
association, then written approval from the association .i n support of the proiebt must be received by a duly authorized agent for said association.
G. Any add'itional material necessary for the rev'iew of the application as
determ'ined by the zoning administrator..
* For interior modificatjons, an improvement survey and site p)an may be
waived by the zoning administrator.
IV. Time Requirments
The Planning and Environmental Commission meets of each month. A complete applicat'ion form and
(as described above) must be submitted a minimum
PEC publ'i c hearing, No incomplete applications
administrator) wil) be accepted by the planning
nated submittal date.
on the 2nd and 4th Mondays
al1 accompanying material
of 4 weeks prior to the date of the (as determined by the zoning
staff before or after the desiq-
DATE T'l'T.ff""'
RECEIVED FROM
A-DDRESS
DOLLARS $-
Pemit Numbers Police Receipt Numbers
HOW PA]D-Cash-Check- Bv-
PEc -3- 6/ro/o
on the proposal . Rapson moved and Affeldt seconded to table this item to to an indefinite d
2.uest for a densit control variance of 395 f
n 0r0er -+storv Io a res I
277 Co umbine Drive.pl i cants: Timo
Kristan Pritz presented the request expiaining that because of the small size of the lots in Bighorn Terrace, all construction encroached on the property
lines and any additions would have to include setback variances. She stated 'that presentiy the dweiling contained 748 square feet of GRFA and the request of 395 feet would result in a total GRFA of'l ,143 square feet or 539 square feet over the allowable GRFA. The staff felt that to approve the request for 395 square feet of GRFA would be a grant of special privilege and also felt that this request disregarded 0rdinance No. 4 which was intended to address upgrading of existing homes. The PEC and Town Council have worked for over a year to write an ord'i nance that would allow home owners to apply for no more than 250 square feet of additional GRFA in order to upgrade'their
homes. The staff felt that the applicants couid work within the allotment of 250 square feet for their addition, realizing that setback variances would still be necessary for either type of addition.
Tim Boyle, one of the applicants, stated that they had two options when adding on, to either expand upward or outward. They fell that an uilward expansion
would have less impact on the neighbors because their unit was somewhat detached.
He added that he was aware of Ordinance 4 but felt the request would not
have much impact on the neighborhood, it would on'ty be 33' high, would solve the problem of a leaking roof, would improve the appearance of the building,
and would not be a grant of spec'i al privilege since'so many other Bighorn -
Terrace residents hid been grinted variances.
Affeldt wondered if Boyle had tried to add a third story and still stay within
250 square feet, and Boyle said he believed'it would noi be as aestheticaily pleasi.ng. Rapson.agreed with the staff concerning the 250 square foot timii as did Donovan and schultz. Piper pointed out thit now that'there was an
ordinance to work with, this was the first request to ask for more than
250 square feet.
Rapson moyed qnd Donovan sqconded to approve the setback variances. The
v-ote was_5-0 to approve. Rapson moved and Donovan se-onded lg1lglyqtre request for a GRFA variance. The vote
requst.
3. Bequelt to a[end an approved development plan to al]ow for a two year
interim development p'l an for theffirea.Appltcant: vat I Assoclates, Inc.
The applicant requested to table this item until June 24.
seconded and voted to table to 6/24.
and setback variances ot 20-D, Biqhorn Terra
e and Debbie Ni
It was moved,
D r:.^t -4- 6/10/Bs
Eapsgn moved to.deny the request but there t,las no second Affelt moved and Schultz-seconded to approvgm not const.i tute a
4. leque:t fgr I 'lg,foot setback,v?rianqe and, a fout percent s jte coverage in order to buit9 a sgrage=?lg to=r r@
Rick Pylman expl.ained the requests and stated that the property had a very steep (187s) grade which was unsafe and the applicant wiitrei to buiid a gaiage within 5 feet of the front_property line. Thb zoning code requiied 2.s"pai[ing
:Pucg:, but the proposal allowed for only two on-s.i te parking'spaces with the.third parking space partially within the Town righi-of-wiy.' The Town engineer was concerned with potential negative impacis upon tiaffic and upon
9now removal and had requested that the appficant addres! his parking requirements !vjthin his property boundaries.
Ken Wentworth, architect for the applicant, stated that there was other park.i ng on the street, so this would not be a grant of specia'l privilege, wentwbrth expiained that the garage could not be-moved farther Uabf Uecaise oi-iooiing conditions. Bill AndrewS, Town Engineer, stated that this proposal was similar to_that of the stephenson.request in that it was important !o bet the parking off of the street. He added that for snow removal ,' it was important tb get -
the parking as far off of the street as possible. wentworth iointed out"that the existing retaining wall encroaches onto the street eirery bit as much as the_.parking would. Andrews said that the property had teen annexed that way. The board discussed other possible solutions.
and was warran cause t str or
o
ncons t stent w
w car com l ng down throu
ex l sts.pson felt that there must would sol ve
favor and 2
uDIlc neatEn,
n the vicinity,teral interpretat entorcement
ectrrves o rea
rouqntare as e orl vew now r oes'l gn erat i on
n
the prob'l em other than the (Rapson and Piper) against.
ano
one
cons
The
t
3 in
order
presented.vote was
5.uest for an ex rior alteration and side setback variances in to enc ose a deck att KB Ranc any restaurant located in t
on uare Lodqe,pp cant:on uare Ltd Partnership
R-ick Pylman reviewed the request and the criteria, showing site plans and elevations. He stated that the staff recornmended approval . Jim cunningham,representing the owners told a little of the niiioiv'ino-llit<e s.rgemeisiei,'llte KB Ranch restaurant owner added more information. Donovan was concerned that the a enclosure not look rike ani,idd on.', pilten-iul'.on...n"d about the sign over the entrance to the Lionsquare Lodge advertising tne resiiurint.
Sapsor-t-nqyed and Aflerdt seconded to apprgye !!e sstback variance to ailow
lnu "n.lorr!" 0"" t
Kapson moved and S"hult? se.on9e! !o qp or aEgrgq_qq_pe|ffi vote was 5-o in tuuffi
ORDINANCE NO. 4
Series of .|985
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 18 OF THE l'4UNICIPAL CODE OF
THE TOl,lN OF VAIL BY THE ADDITION OF A NEl.l CHAPTER I8.7I
ENTITLED ''ADDITIONAL GROSS RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA'' AND
PROVIDING FOR AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF GROSS RESIDENTIAL
FLOOR AREA NOT TO EXCEED 250 SQUARE FEET TO BE ALLOCATED
IN CERTAIN SPECIFIC SITUATIONS, PROVIDED CERTAIN CRITERIA
ARE MET AND SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN REGARD THERETO.
WHEREAS, the Town of Vail Conmunity Action Plan encourages the upgrading and
remodeling of existing structures; and
bIHEREAS, the Town Council is of the belief that it would benefit the health,
safety, and welfare of the Town of Vail to al'low property owners to add up to an
additional 250 square feet of Gross Residentjal Floor Area (GRFA) as an inducement
for the upgrading of existing structures whjch are five years old or older.
NOl.t, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOI,IN COUNCIL OF THE TOl.lN OF VAIL AS FOLLOWS:
Section l. Title 18 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail is hereby amended
entitled "Additional Gross Residential Floor by the addition of a new chapter 18.71
Area" to read as follows:
18.71 .0] 0 Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to provide an inducement for the upgrading of individual
dwelling units in certain structures which have been in existence within the Town
of Vail for a period of at least five years by permitting the addition of up to
250 square feet of gross residential floor area to dwelling units'in sa'id structures,
provided the criteria set forth in this chapter are met. This chapter does not
assure each dwelIing unit located within the Town of Vail an additional 250 square
to site planning, impact on
standards.\l /Additiona'l GRFA
dwell ing [n'it only once.
adjacent properties, and applicable Town of Vail development ,'
allowed under this provision shall be granted to any
18.71 .020 Sinq]e Family, Primar.v/Secondary and Two Famil.y Residential Dwellinqs
Any dwelling unit not restricted by the Town of Vail to housing for full time employees
of the Upper Eagle Va11ey, in single family, primary/secondary, or two family resi-
dentjal dwelling units shall be eligib'le for additjonal GRFA not to exceed a maximum
of 250 square feet of GRFA per dweiiing unit in additjon to the existing GRFA or
the allowab] e GRFA for the site. Before such addjtjonal GRFA can be granted, the
dwelling unit shall meet the following criteria:
a.At least five years must have passed from
a temporary certificate of occupancy or a
from the date the orig'ina1 building permit
the date the dwe'l ling unit was issued
ninimum of sjx years must have passed
was issued for the construction of
the dwelling unit.
The dwell'ing unit shall have received its final certificate of occupancy.
Proposals for the ut'ilization of the add'itional GRFA under th'is provision shall
comply with all Town of Vail zoning requirements and applicable development
standards. If a variance is required for a proposal , it shall be approved by
the Pl-anning and Environmental Comm'ission pursuant to Chapter .l8.62 before an
application is made in accordunce with this chapter.
Adjacent property owners and owners of dwelling units on the same lot as the
applicant sha'l I be notified of any app'licat'ion under this chapter that jnvolves
any external alteratjons to an existing structure. Notification procedures shall
be as outlined in Section 18.66.080 of the zoning code.
If any proposal provides for the conversion of a garage or enclosed parking area
to GRFA, such conversion will not be allowed unless a new garage or enclosed parking
area is also proposed. Plans for a new garage or enclosed parking area shall
accompdny the appljcatjon under this chapter, and shall be constructed concurrently
with the conversion.
Any increase in parking requirements as set forth in Chapter .|8.52 due to any
GRFA addition pursuant to this chapter shall be met by the applicant.
AII proposals under this section shall be required to conform to the Design Review
Guidelines set forth'in chapter .l8.54 of the vai'l Municipal code. Any dwe'l1ing
unjt for which an add'ition is proposed shall be requ'ired to meet the minimum
Town of Vail landscaping standards as set forth in Chapter 18.54 of the Vail
Municipal Code. Before any additional GRFA may be perm'itted in accordance with
this chapter, the staff sha'll review the maintenance and upkeep of the existing
dwe'l ling unit and site, including landscaping to determjne whether they comply
wjth the Design Review Gu'idelines. No temporary certificate of occupancy shall
be issued for any expansion of GRFA pursuant to this chapter until all required
lmprovements to the site and structure have been completed as requ.ired.
The provisions of this section are applicable only to GRFA additions to single
dwelling,units. No poo'l ing of gross residential floor area shall be allowed in
single family, primary/secondary,ortwo family residentjal dwel'l ing units. No
b.
c.
d.
e.
,c
g.
h.
-J-
application for additional GRFA shal1 request more than 250 square feet
of gross residential floor.area per dwel'l ing unit.
18.71.030 Multi-Family 0we'll ings
Any dwelf ing unit in a multi-family dwelling, as that term is defined by
Section 18.04"090, of the Vail Munjcipal Code, shall be eligible for additional
GRFA not to exceed a maximum of 250 square feet of GRFA in addition to the exist.-
ing GRFA or the allowable GRFA for the site. Any application for such additional
GRFA must meet the foliowing criteria:
a. At least five years must have passed from the date the structure was
issued a temporary certificate of occupancy or a minimum of six years
must have passed from the date the original building permit was issued
for the construction of the structure.
b. Proposals for the utjlization of the addjtional GRFA shall comply with
all Town of Vail zoning requirernents and applicable development standards.
If a variance'is required for the add'itional GRFA, it shall be approved
by the Planning and Enviromental Conrnission pursuant to Chapter 18.62
before an application is made in accordance with this chapter.
c. The structure has received its final certificate of occupancy.
d. Portions of existing enclosed parking areas may be converted to GRFA
under this ordinance if there is no loss of existing enclosed parking
spaces in said enclosed parking area.
e. Any increase in parking requirements due to any GRFA addition pursuant
to this chapter shall be met by the appljcant.
f. A11 proposals under this section shall be reviewed for compliance with
the Design Review Guidelines as set forth in Chapter 18.54 of the Vail
Municipal Code, Exist'ing properties for which addit'ional GRFA is proposed
shall be required to meet minjmum Town of Vail landscaping standards as
set forth'in Sect'ion 18.54 of the Va'i I Municipal Code. General maintenance
and upkeep of existing structures and sites, including the rnulti-family
dwel 1ings, landscaping or site improvements (i.e. trash facilities' berm-
in to screen surface parking, etc.) sha1l be reviewed by the staff after
J
the app'l icat'ion is made for conformance to sa'id Design Review Gujldlines.
This review sha11 only take p1 ace for the first appl ication for additional
GRFA in any multi-family drvelling unit. No temporary certificate of
occupancy shall be issued for any expansion of 6RFA pursuant to this
chapter untjl all required improvements to the multj-family dwelljng
site and structure have been comp'l eted as required'
g. If the proposed additjon of GRFA is for a dwelling un'i t located in a
condominium project, a letter approving such add'i tion from the condominium
association shall be required at the time the application is submitted'
h. No deck or balcony enclosures, or any exterior additions or alterations
to multi-family dwellings with the exception of windows' skylights, or
other similar modifications shall be allowed under this chapter.
i. The provisions of this section are applicable only to GRFA additions to
indiv'idual dwel'l ing units. l'lb "pool'ing" of GRFA shall be allowed in
multi-fami'ly dwellings. No application for additional GRFA sha11 request
more than 250 square feet of gross residential floor are per dwelling unit.
L8.72.040 Procedure
The following procedure shall be followed by anyone w'i shing to obtain additional
GRFA pursuant to th'i s chapter:
a. Applicat'ion shall be made to the Community Deveiopment Department on forms
provided by the Conrnunity Deve'l opment Department and shall jnclude:
l) A fee of $100.00 shal'l be required with the application.
2) Infonnatiog and plans as set forth and required by Section 18.54.040C.
lt[J 3) llames anil4addresses of adjacent property owners and owners of 'I
dwelfing units on the same lot as the applicant.
4) Any other applicable jnformatjon requ'i red by the Commun'i ty Development
Department to sat'i sfy the criteria outlined in th'is chapter.
b. Upon receipt of a completed application form, fee and other required in-
formatjon, a member of the staff of the Community Development Department
wil'l make a site visit to assess the existing condition of the site with
regard to the Town of Vail landscap'ing and site improvement standards set
forth in Chapter 18.54. In app'l icable cases, the staff of the Community
Development Department shall submit its recommendations regarding the site
and structure jmprovements and landscap'i ng to the Design Review Board.
-5-
If the Community Development Department staff determines that
the site for which the application was submitted is in compliance
with Town of Vail landscaping and site 'inprovement standards,
the applicant shall proceed as follows:
1) Application for GRFA additions which involve no change to
the exterior of a structure shall be reviewed by the Conrnunity
Development Department staff.
2) App'l ications for GRFA add'itions involving exterior changes
to a structure shall be reviewed b.y the staff and the Design
Review Board in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 13.54.
If the Community Development Department staff determines that
the site for which additional GRFA is applied for pursuant to
this chapter does not comply with minimum Town of Vail landscaping
or site standards as provided herein, the applicant wi'll be
required to bring the s'ite into compljance with such standards
before any such temporary or permanent certificate of occupancy
will be issued for the additional GRFA added to the site. Before
any building permit is issued, the app'l icant shall submit appropriate
plans and materials indicating how the site wilI be brought
into compliance with said Town of Vail minimum standards, which
plans anC materials shall be reviewed by and approved by the
Cornmunity Development Department.
Upon receiving the necessary approvals pursuant to this chapter,
the applicant shall proceed with the securing of a bui'l ding
permit prior to beginning the construction of additional GRFA.
t. Any dec'ision of the Community Development Department staff pursuant
to this chapter may be appealed by any applicant in accordance
with the provisions of Section .|8.66.030 of the Town of Vail
Municipal Code.
d.
e.
-6-
Section 2.
If any part, section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is
for any reason held to be invalid, such decis.ion shall not affect the validity of
the remaining portions of this ordinance; and the Town Council hereby declares it
would have passed this ordinance, and each part, section, subsection, sentence,
clause or phrase thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more parts,
sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid.
Section 3.
o
The repeal or the repeal and reenactment of any provisions of the Vail Municipal
Code as provided in this ordinance shall not affect any right which has accrued,
any duty imposed, anyvio:Iatiionthat occurred prior to the effective date hereof,
any prosecution commenced, nor any other action or proceeding as commenced under
or by virtue of the provision repealed or repea'l ed and reenacted. The repeai of
any provisjon hereby shall not revive any provis'ion or any ordinance previously
repealed or superseded unless expressly stated herein.
The Town Council hereby
necessary and proper for
the inhabitants thereof.
Section 4.
INTRODUCED,
1985, and a
of ,1985 at 7:30 p.m.
Municipal Building, Vail, Colorado.
0rdered pub'lished in full this day of
ATTEST:
finds, determines and declares that this ordinance is
the health, safety and welfare of the Town of Vail and
READ AND PASSED ON FIRST READING
public hearing shall be held on
day of
on the day
Chambers of the Vail
THI S
this ordinance
in the Council
,1985.
Paul R. Johnston, Mayor
Pamela A. Brandmeyer,
INTRODUCED, READ AND
ATTEST:
READING AND ORDERED PUBLISHED
of
Town Clerk
APPROVED
thi s
ON SECOND
Pamela A. Brandmeyer, Town Clerk
day
Paul R. Johnston, Mayor
ry6f,.
SUBJECT: Request for a side setback variance.of r feet, a rear setback variance of l3 feet, a front setback varianie-of 3 feet and a GRFA va.i ance in order to construct an aaoriioi'ro u residence on Lot r 7, Bighorn Terrace. Appl icants: -Ho*iro -;r; \/;;;;.i'i=$,.r,^
DESCRIPTION OF VARIANCE REQUESIED
The Sherrs are requesting these variances in order to construct a d.i ninq room addition of approiimateti a5 square ieet on the fi.ti iioo. of their unit.An existing bedroom wouri be converted into a Jini;;'.;;;: The additionar area proposed in this request wourd be.used for dining ipu... The applicants are also requestinq to extend their eilsting ou.r'ir'ir.r."iront of their unit to the east approximately-7.7 feet in oioer-lo cariy the deck Jround the front of the house and back to the new addition. unit lz-ir rto..t"a-il'elgr,orn Terrace sub-division. The rot confisuration is raio ori i;;;;;";"ri; that the 20 foot setbacks that are requir6d for the MDMF zone encroach onto rhe structures on each rot. In th'is situation, the 20 f;i;;;;;;r"uir.Ju.n.s on ail sides 'of the sherr's unit. on'rv a_smiti foriion or ir,"i.''uri'i'i, u.tuuny within the buirdabre area outside of the setbacks.The f;jro;;.J iiure shows the GRFA and variance statistics for this piop"r.V,
Unit .l7, Bighorn Terrace (east ha1 f of duplex)
Zone: MDMF
Lot Area: .l790 sf
S.i tF coverag€: 806 Ff al l owed 31/st existinq
*42'Sr p.oposei
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
*t lorEd-6prl:
a
Pl anni ng and Envi ronmental Commjssion
Community Development Department
February ll, 1985
6H
C OY
43.l sf lst floor
395 sf 2nd floor
=;?--^-uzb st total existing GRFA
GRFA:- I
6lLsu{
- 627 sf allowed
+
.--t); , k ll
9i1 s6
-.J.J ST
919 tr Total proposed GRFA - b't/ sf al'l orved GRFA ^-]-..+v st amount over allovted
199 sf existing amount over -50_aF proposed additiona l
GRFA
allowed GRFA
GRFA over existing
./1-r-..- t
' "o'' /'
fvi
. fL'..r v^ 4,
arnount over allowed GRFA
826 sf existing GRFA
bedroom area that already existed
lr.r[+- * .' ,l'- !,"[ ['- :,,, ' / r,t ;-,r../ 3 r , {,- c ?r''
C Setbacks: 20 feet front, side and rear
Request 3 foot front setback in
east__maintains
Request ll foot side setback in maintains 9 feet
Request 13 foot rear setback .in
maintains 7 feet
(Please see site plan.)
Shev 2/11/85
Section ,l8.62.060 of the Mun i ci I Code recommends approvaT o er ues vart ance.
_order to extend an existing deck to the 7 feet from south property.l ine.
?:::"^1", construct the dining area__rrom east property t:ne.
?:9:. to. construct the dining area__rrom north property rrne
1..
The applicants have stated the followit are 5uitifiedr -j' JL.,LE., Lrrs rur ruwin9 reasons why they feel that these variances
"'ue respectful1v request variancer f?:-r:!!lcks and. GRFA for our proposed addition il"S;:l'$l"l*:: iii j:ii"il'ijg;3r '"',u.". inif p,"op.'ty was purchased
oto ino ii';'';;# ;;lr!;[";;j,iii,!n1{; .Ihu propertv r; approximately 20 years
i;i^:91;i ;::':ilj::Tiii#:il:?ilirirHi:,ul.ilra:l,i,i"iliii*:i,l:l;*;;;,,
GRFA and a setback iriteria."-A;; ;il;"s" t" in""f,rjil,,i,,f;jllii; l?ll"lTT.ri require a variance..- This u*ptui,i,s-"f,v so many have beei,with more undoubtedlv i"-n" i"qr"it"l- i n ti,u-irt;;;. "';;l"i#:;:l"fr.:30:;lir",reasonable to us that the stridi o"-iite"at-i"i"rp."t"ii'in uno enforcement of lff,^5l5f"lio";":ll'o resuratioii iouio resurl i; 5;;;;i.i, oirrj.,rty to the
rqu.!{ p'"op".ii.i'.fifiiil'i;.rlnin!.lljiil,;l.ffi:,:"rfj :j::liliil..li::1,identicar additions'-^gr^gii;;.n'.'i"i.u.. neighbors-r,u"u-rent their support to our project and enclosed ire signed,copies-oi-it"i,i,ig.uement. The board or directors or the oishorn Nuirii'iino;r;;;;r"Ar;i,ii.til,.' have reviewed our plans and fuity-enioise "r.'ir"i"rut. we hope you wi, .l ook favorab.r v on this proposa'|. It is on" inui "iii ,uun much to our.iamily,s enjoyneni.,,
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Consideration of Factors
Both the setback variances and the GRFA variance will not have impacts on the existing or poiuntiui"li.r and structures in the
any negative
vi ci nity.
-3- tnU z/11/Bs
The d ree to which relief from _the strict or literal 'I nre rPretat jon and en-orceient o a spec ulation is necessary ro ac eve comoat and yn i fg',ni l{, of t to 3rttai n the ectives
Staff feels that due to the confiquration of it would not be a specia'l privilele io g.un.
GRFA Variance
the lots'i n this subdivision,these variances for setbacks.
Staff feels that it wourd-be a grant of special privirege to approve the GRFA variance' The desire to increaie the dining u.ul io.'iiir"rnit does not constitute a physicai hardship on the s'ite which *outo""ir.i"i-it""gru.ting of this GRFA addition' The following ctta.i-siiowi uurlun." requests which have been reviewed in the past for the Bighorn Terrace Subdivision: '
DATE APPL I CANT
VARIANCE REQUEST HISTORY OF BIGHORN TERRACE SUBDIVISION
TYPE AMOUNT OF
VAR I ANCE EST RE
STT.FF
RECOMMENDAT I ON
PEC
ACT I ON
Approval
Approva I
Approval
App ro va 1
Approvai
Approval
Approvai
Approval
Table
Approvai
App rova 1
Approval
Nar 77 Benysh
Rowe
Al der
Turnbul I
Curfman
0dum
0dum
Houston
GRFA
Setback
GRFA
Setback
GRFA
Set bac k
Setbac k
GRFA
GRFA
Se tback
Setback for
Ai rl ock
GRFA
Setback
130 sq 8ft
473 sq
7q
7tt
177 sq
122 sq
IU TE
18 ft
80 sq
16 ft
App rova 1
Approval
Den i al
Den i al
Den i al
Den i al
Approval
Denial
Deni al
Approval
Approval
Deni al
Denial
IL
May 78
July 78
Aug 78
Aug 80
Aug 82
Sep 82
_Nov 83
ft ft
ft 75 sq 8ft
ft
Tt
ft
-r+-err ?/11/85 Sh o
The chart indicates that granting the setback variances would not be a orant of special privilege. However, it does show that the granting of the ujdiir;onal
GRFA would be a grant of special privilege. The existing GRFA of th; rnit-*ilnout the_addition is_presently 784 square feet. The allowed GRFA for this property is 627 sq ft. The existing unit is now )99 square feet over the alfowbA-bnial This non-conform'ing situation.would only be'i ncreased by the approval of the olnlng room addltion. With the new addition, the additional GRFA over the al'lowed would become 249 square feet.
ffi
**lu.rrnces would not have any negative impacts upon these areas of concern.
Such other factors and criteria as the commissfon deems a I icable to the osed
s FI NDI NGS
That the grant'i ng of the variance wjll not constitute a grant of speciai privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties clissified in the same djs*urict.
That.the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,safety, or welfare, or materjally.injurious to properties or rmprovements in the vicr'nity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
The strict or literal .interpretation and enforcement of the specified requlatjon would resutt in pract.ical difficutty or unnecessary pnysicil-;;;;;;il iiiJ,llil."..with the objectives of this tr'tle. -
There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not appry g"nrruiiv-to-otn". properties in the same zone.
The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement -ryor'|9 depnive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by in the same district.
of, the specified regulation
Ene owners of other properties
-s- ]rr zl11/Bs
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff is recommendinq
opinion that there ii
area is necessary and
interpretation of the
The staff recommends approval of the setback variances. There are extraordinary circumstances on this site due to the configuration-oi-tfre"ioi ii."i.'-'i["-iivirt of the lots makes it nearly impossible to d6 any type oi"Jooition ro the structure without requesting setback variances.
GRFA Variance
denial gf lhg 50 square foot GRFA variance based on the lo pnysrcat hardship which indicates that the dining room therefore deserves rel ief from the strict or i iterai GRFA requirements for this lot. .
o
Lot 17, Bighorn Terrace
36035'40"W
485
U NIT I5
INC LU DE D PARCEI
POL rc Y NO AZSe
UNIT IB +
Ll^'
9o.
'p..
6,;
'"I
to36'oo E ,
cO<
0AvO/4/€
(\l
sf
o N
4o\.UNIT
)
oo
oh
'/1..
c
=
(r
_(t
ol o
o
(\,lo
I tz
ouTL rNE OF
WEST HALF OF OUPLEX\
\/
a 85. (LEGAL )
a 99 16alC )
DOG .'
H OUSE .'$
.uo
"al t3 ",
/;o'
a?r,
o)n )i
DECK
'.. .rip*r.d Nltr/ 17 D s
)i3t".,',,",,Ar v\?*\
\,t
g' O)
PARK ITIG
EASEI,'ENT
?s.
ovElHANGX
- q9
'"o
I
^v
t
I
t t
!i I l
:
I
E
I
(&-
't ''l'I
{I
I t
1
$p \c.
!t'', c -ix.
t
q
6t
"1i
DEF'IN 11'T()iI S
fB.04.I30 Floor area, cross Residential (GRFA)
Gross Residential Floor Area (cRf.A) is defined as the totaf area withi_n the en_closj-ng walls of a structure irrcluding all habitable areas; exclutling crawl spaces and attic areas rvith a ceiling height of five (5) feet or l.ess. overlapping stair-ways shall only be counted at the 1o\,rest level . f'or the l,r.lrpose of determin jng
ceiling height within an attic area, thc ceiling height shail be calculated as the distance between the top side of the structural memlcers of a ceiling and the underside of the structural members of the roof directly abcve. (An atilc area which is created by ccnstruction of a roof by truss-type rnen:ers r+il1 be exen,pted from calculation provided that the trusses by spaced no further than thirty inches (30") apart.) A crawl space shall be defined as an area where the distance between the surface of the earth and/or floor sl/stem, and the underside of the structural
memlcer (s) of the floor directly above does not exceed five (5) feeL and is acces-sible by an opening not to exceed nine (9) square feet in area.
Notlrithstanding the foregoing, the followj.ng l- i$itations and allo,aances sha1l apply:
1. Within the SRFI R, and R P/S zone districts the following additional areas shall be excluded from calculation as GRFA:
a. Enclosed garages of three hundred (300) square feet per each vehrcle space not exceeding a maximun of 2 spaces per a110wab1e dwelling unit;
b- Mechanical area not exceeding, a maximum of fifLy (5o) square feet per allowable dwelling unit;
c- A11 or part of an airlock not exceeding a max imum of twenty-five (25) sguare feet per allowable dwelling u:rit;
d. storage area or combination of storage areas not exceeding a max in,on of two hundred (200) square feet per allowable dwelling unit;
. e. solar heating rock storage areas.
Any square footage in excess of thc maxjmun credit allowed in I through 4 above v"ill be inclucled in the calculation of Gross Residential Floor Area.
2. within buildings containing more than 2 alloviable dwelli-ng or accommod:tion u[its, the following additional areas shall be excluded from calculation as
GRFA:
a. Garages;
b. Solar heating rock storage arcas;c. Mechanical areas;
d. Cornmon hallrvays, comnon closets, lobby areas, stairways and c.nri:lon cnclosed rcc:rcational t-acilj.tios not cxccccling a rnaxirnurn of "rp amount c.:ri.i'l Lr-r lO,i
. of thc allouitl'1r: CIil:A psnnjltc(l on thc lot. An\- s(rr.t.-rrc footir(1,. ,,,1r ic'lt .,xcee4s thc 201.; nrax i.:uun w:"1 I bc inclu(i(-d i.n ohc c.rlculiit i()n of cRpA;e. All or part of an .irlock not cxc,lcding d ma\imum or. twenty-fi't, (irr) s.Iur-rrc feet pcr allowablc ciwcllinq unil:. (Ord. .11, 19S2)
306-r
(o
\,lEDIUN,I.DENSITY \4 ULTIPLE.FAiV{ IL\' (\,ID}t R DISTRICT
complelion of the previous stase.
tOrd. l9(1979) $ 5 (pirl: Ord. 50] 1978) S t8 (part).)
18.16.110 Coverage.
Not nrore than thirtv_tlve
be covered by'buiidings. (Ord.
percen! ot the total site area shail
8( l9;3) ..c .+.,i07.)
{L
18.16-1,30 Landscaoing antl site develoDrnenr.
. At least iorry percent oi each site shlil be
:j'lir:iT of anv area quatitying as landscrping teet rvith a minimum area not lcss rhan rliree-feet. (Ord. l9(1976) g j (partr: Ord.8(1973) \
18.16. 1-10 Parking.
-,- O iit,,r:.:
_
p.rking shall be providetl in ascorciance with
:,rluprcr.,Ld.:i. No prrking shall be locered in any required tront s!'tback.area, except as may be speciiically autlrorized in rccordance ivith the provisions or Chapier lg.6l. (Ord. g(l97tt
$ .1.510. )
lendscuoed. The
shaii be rifieen
nunoreci square
1.509.)
St'ctiorrs:
I r{. I r.r.0l0
18.18.0:0
I I't. I lJ.0i0
I S. I s.010
ili. ts.05()
I ti.l s.060
Ili. l t{.0)i0
llJ. I lJ.0()0
Chaprer lS.lg
\lhl)l Ull-t)I:NStTY ]l U LTIpLL_F..\]ltLy
tttt))tF) DISTRICT
Prrrposc.
PL'n it terl scs.
Corrditionll rr scs.
\cccssrrr.t,trscs.
Lot :rrclr :rrrrl site rlirrrcrrsiorrs.
.Sct b:rck.s.
I Ici,.:.lr r.
l)ensity,t'orrlrol.
('{)vCritqe.llJ. lri. t lo
a
ZONI\G
lE.l8.l30 Landscaping
lE.l8.l40 Parkins.
and site development.
t_
t3.18.010 Purpose.
The medium-ciensitv muirroie-tamih. disrricr is intended ro pror ide sires Ior mulrrpie-tamirr rJ*.et,ings "r o.nrii,., ro a ma.ri_muI^o@. tL)rerher rvirh such puDllc tacr,ltles as mJv aoprdnrrarcir be locatecl in tne ,:rme district. -fhe meciium-densLrr miritioie-rarniit .i,rr.cr is intended io ensure a<lequare Irght. arr. rlDen sDJce. and other amenltles
commensurate u ith muitrple-tamri1.occuoanc\. ano rd maurrJln the ciesirable residcnrial qualiries oi rhe ttrsrrrcr b' e:tablishrns approoriate :ite dr-'r elonnrent itanotrus. Cert;.r in n,r,lrer,oent ral
uses are permirred as condilionai uses. ancj rr ircre pernrilleci. ere intended ro blend harmonrousir rr ith rl,,c resiricntiai ciraracler tri the districr. (Ord. -17(l9ti0) g 6 rparr): Ord. -rUr 197;) $ 5: Ord.
s( r973) $ 5. t00.)
1E.18.020 Permitted uses.
The folloiving uses shell be ncrmitrcei in rhc \l D\l F disrrict:A. Single-tamilv rcsidenrial drr c'ilinss:
B. Trvo-t a milv rcsitlenrial drrellinqsl
C. \1uh iplc-famiit. residcnrial .l*-clli.,:s. ine lrrdinr: rlrucncd ()r
rorv drvcilinss a nd condonriniu m d rr cl lin:ls.(Ord. S( I97l) J 5.:00.)
l8.l11.030 ( ondition:rl u:cs.
Ihc t.rllr>*r.u eonrrrtirnal rrscs shlr r.,c l.crrrrrttcti iir lrrc \l I) \1F tii:trict. :r.rb jsct trr rs5|',.,,r,.. ()f it L ( | ll(llt rr;n.r i trre nc r:l.l i t trr accordancc s rth thc pr()\'lst()ns irt Cltilnte r lS.()0:r\. Ittrblie utilitr lrrrti prrlrlic scn rec u\c\.B. I'rrl-rlic Irrrildirrsr. -!r'rrrutdr. ..n(l tlrerilltc\:C. I'rtblic r)r p \ittc scll(r(ti\:
D. Itublic p:rrk arrtl rccrc.rtt()u t.rcrlitrts.
E. Ski lilts ;rnd tLrrr s:
Ij. l'riritc t ltrbr:rrrri ciric. uultrrrlrl .rr:.1 lr.lrtrt iri r)l !. ./irlr(!t!\:
trl
\I EDIL'\I-DE\SIT}'Il L LTJ PI-E.F \ \I IL\-(\1D\I R DISTR.ICT
G. Dog ken nel.
(Ord. l0(1982) :r 5: O1j..r-1 9x9y,i 6 Ord. 8( l97l) S 5.100.)
t perr ): Ord. I l l9i(1 ,s
t 8.18.0J0 Accessorv uses.
- _ _The t'ollorlinq "i..rro.,. uses shall bc permrtted in the M D\l F district:
A. Private qreenhouses. toolshe<js. plar.nouses. attacn:d gar-
ages or carDons. s*,imminrr por_ris. pat ios. o.,.ara",,un ,"aili_
r) tles customariil incidentai ro permrrrcd rcsrcientral uses:D. I r Ome occu pallons. sub.iect ro issuance or a irome occuparron permll in accorciance * ith rhe pror isions ois..iion, rs.-.g. r _r0 ihroush l,!.58. 190:C. Otheruses customarilr. incidental and accessorr. to permrrred
_ or conditional uses. und n..-r.".,,j i";;lr;;;;:,;,on tnereoi.(Ord. 8( i97j) { 5.J00.)
13.18.0-i0 Lot area an j site dimensions.
Tltc nrininrum lot or sitc area shall bc ren thousurrc squ.,rre Ieet ol buiidable srtc area. und cech ,it. ,t.,"ii t.r"i.* o nln,*u,r_,fronta-sc or.thirrv fe*. Elch site shall b" ;,i,;-.i;., anrJ shape cirpa tllc .i enclosin,{ a squarc' a rca cight' tccr nn *r., :,rdc * rthr rr Its boundarics. (Ord. llfl97S) s\ I {p-urit.)
I lJ. I il.06t) Scr tracks.
lrr rhc \l t)\l F tlistrict. rhc
t\r'cnlv lcct. tltc rnirrirrrrrrrt sitlr,
thc minrrnunt rca r rct blck rhlrll
( pa rr ). )
Inllllntunl lt ()nt \ct itilek :lreil hC sctheck shull bc t\\cnt\. lccr. ut)d
bc r\\ cnr \' tccr. 1Ortl. .i0{ i9-:i) us l
I i{.I tl.(ltttt I l cir;h t.
l-()f:r llitl t rlrrl o1 11111n.,;1r(l t()()1. tltc ircrr:itt dl hurltlrrrlr .,itltil not c\,(cc(l tllrt.._ll\c lccl .l rrr.:l \l()l)ut! ,,,,,i ,1r"..i,",a,,,,.,ri lrtttl,lrrtls rlr:r.l n,rl (.\Lci-,(t tl:rr,.. , ,,,,,', ..] '.',','-,'
](l):lrt).1 I | ! I I I t '' - ( | t : I I t lc('l (()r(l i;l l!)\11) { l
o
ZONING
18.18.090 Density control.
A. Not more than thirty-five square feet of gross residential
floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted for each one hundred
square feet of buildable site area. Total density shail not
exceed eighteen dwelling units per acre of buildable site
area.
B. Exemptions. All projects that have received final design
review board approval as of December 19, 1978, shall be
exempt from the changes in this section as long as the project commences within one year from the date of final
approval. If the project is to be developed in stages, each
stage shall be commenced within one year after the
completion o f the previous stage.
(Otd.19(1979) $ 5 (part): Ord.50(j978) g t8 (part).)
(,
18.18.110 Coverage.
Not more than forty-five percent of the total site area shall
be covered by buildings. (Ord. 8(19?3) g 5.507.)
C
18.18.130 landscaping and site development.
At least thirty percent of the total site area shall be
landscaped. The minimum width and length of any area
quatifying as landscaping shall be fifteen feet with a minimum
area not less than three hundred square feet. (Ord. 19(1976)
$ 6 (part): Ord. 8(1973) $ 5.509.)
18.18.140 Parking.
Off-street parking shall be provided in accordance with
Chapter 18.52. At least one-half the required parking shall be
located within the main building or buiidings and hidtlen from public vjew or shall be completely hidden fiom public view
from adjoining properties within a landscaped berrn. No parking
or loading area shall be located in any required front setback
area. (Ord. 19(1976) g 6 (part): Ord. 8(1973) $ S.510.)
(va'l l-a+l)334
,.4
Oaprir zg, r9B5 Appl i cati on Date
PEC MEETING DATE
APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE
i' This procedure is,required fgf gn{ project requesting a variance. The appl .i cation will not be accepted until all iniol^maiion is submitied.
A. NAME 0F APPLICANT lirotf,y U. Bovte - D Nicholson
ADDRESS
Vail, Colorado 81657 PH]NE 47 6-3?45
APPL ICANT' S REPRESENTATIVE NAME OF
ADDRESS
C. NAME 0F OI^INER (S ) (type
it rc-f 5
ADDRESS
4z?? coLumbine Drive
Vail, Colorado 876
Ti moth
4zZz-c Drive
.)/2d
pHoNE4Z 6tZ4 5
- Debbie K. Nicholson
Vai1, Col-or R1 A <,)p11spp4/ 6-jf 4 J
D.LOCATION OF PROPOSAL
tr
|nhhr^^Lannat,.HUUKEJT +'2'/'/ Colunbine Drive Vail, Col-orado
LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOT2O-DBLOCK FILING B!_glqry
FEE $I OO PAID !-zg-85 cx t 31r FR0t4 Timothy M. Boyle
THE FEE MUST BE PAID BEFORE THE COMMUNITY
YOUR PROPOSAL.
F. A list of the names of owners of all property
INCLUDING PROPERTY BEHIND AND ACROSS bTNEETS,
THE APPLICANT l^iILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CORRE'f
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT |,lILL ACCEPT
adjacent to the subject property
and their mailing addresses.
MAILING ADDRESSES.
II. A PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE WITH A PLANNING STAFF MEMBER IS STRONGLY SUGGESTED T0 ]DETERMINE IF ANY' ADDITIONAL iNF0RMATI0N ri rlrroro. -'li6
npptrcnu0N r4trLL BE AccEPTED uNLEss IT-IS COMPLETE (MUST INCLUDa nff-iiipri"nEQUrRED By THE z0NrNG ADMINISTRAT0R). IT IS THE APPLicANT's nsspoNsisriiiV-ro MKE AN App0TNTMENT hJITH THE STAFF TO FIND OUi NEOIi-ADNTTIONAL SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS.
PLEASE NOTE THAT A qOMPLETE APPLICATION WILL STREAMLINE THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR YOuR PROJEcr ev.orcREASING-THE NUMBER 0F coNDiTIorus-or-nppnovAl THAT THE pLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSI0N unV Sirpur-nTa: Aii-Condiriots 0F AppRovAL MUST BE COMPLIED WITH BEFORE A BUILDING PERMIT TS_iSSffi.-
V
).-
-2-
3. The effect of the variance on light alg_qir, distribution of popuration,transportation, traffic faci I iti eS, uti I ities, ana puUt iC iat[i!.
B. A topographic and/or improvement survey at a scale of at least lu - zo, stamped by a colorado Iicensed surveyor including-lo.iiio.r"or-ill existjng improve-ments, including grades and elevations. -ottrei-"iurn"nir-"hich
must be sho'n are-parking and l0ading areas, ingress and egress, iinascppeo areas and utility and drainage features.
c. l:1lg plan at a scare of at reast r" = 20' showing existing and proposed
bu i 1d'ings.
D. A1l preliminary building elevations the dimens ions , general -appearance,
existjng and proflosed on the site.'
and-floor p1 ans sufficient to indicate scale and use of all buildings and iou.",
E. A preliminary titre report to verify ownership and easements
F' If the proposal is'located in a multi-family development which has a homeowners,association, then written.approval from thdurroiiiiion in support of the projebt must be received by'i outy auttrorizeJ-;;;;;-i;; said association.
G. Any additional material necessary for the review of the appiication as determined by the zon.i ng adminisirator..
* For interior modifications, an improvement survey and site plan may be waived by the zoning admjnistrator.
IV. Time Requirments
The Planning and Environmentai Commission meets of each month. A complete application form and (as described above) must be submitted a minimum PqC^public hearing. No .incomp'lete app'lications administrator) will be accepted by thb planning nated submittal date.
on the 2nd and 4th Mondays al1 accompanying material
.of 4 weeks prior to the date of thl:(as determined by the zoning staff before or after the desiq-
Boyle Engineering , Inc.
143 E- lYeadou Dr. Suite N-10
Uai 1, Colonado 81657
3@3/ 476-2170
To, Planning & Environmental
75 5. Frontaqe Rd. t,.
Vai 1, Colorado 81557
Corqrnission
fleie: Anri I 2Q. lC85
Subject: Uaniance Reque s t
42?'l Colunb ine 0r.
Uai I. Co lorado
Dear Commisgionens:
The Furpose of this letter is to request a 6.R,F.A' variance for a proposed
dddition to my residence at 4277 Colutqbine 0rive. The dddition uriII consist
of an additronal etory on top of the existing tuo stony stnucture. As such,
I will not be approaching any set-backs noF urill I be increasinE thc foot-
pnint of the building. I intend to hoid the neur ridge of the bu j. ldlng below
the 33' height restniction, so again no variance will be nequired on that
point. As you are auare, Bighorn Terrace is composed of a nurrber of sr'rall
singie falrily and duplex residences on extrenely snall sites. Many of the
ouners in this subdj.vision have done additions to thein resid€nc€5 'typically adding on to the perineter of the buildings. Oue to the postdge
stamp size of our lot, I feel that an addition upward will have less inpact
on the site and the neighborhood than a perir4eter addition, Also the flat
roof design of this early Uail home has ceused us numenous problcms oith
leaks that have to be addnessed by creating a slope on the 6xisting
buildlng. By going up uith the addition I wrll basically be solving the
roof pnoblem and creatinq additional space at the same time' Presently the
hone has tr^ro smalI bednooms and one stral I bath which make it nearly
impossible to considen having a family. I intend the finished buiiding to
be considenably rnore attractive than the Mansand Roof urhich i5
pnesently on ihe site. As nany other residents of Bighorn Terrace have been
granted varianc€E to inprove their properties, I feel that I have a night io
enjoy the same privilege. The proposed addition ullI be ap- proximately 400
squane feet. I do not feel that the granting of this variance will affect
the light, ain, distributlon of population, trans- portation, traffic,
utilities or publrc safety in the area. The incneased height _o_f_ - thc
bui ldine ui l-I--nsl--hiJe a detrinental ef f ect on tFE-T',rE-;erghb;r5;u nlilne"
huve a vieu, on sun conridor thnough TFis volunne; tnees tail-en than the
-bnijposed aildiTlon Gxist on- t r,.ro sides of the house, betueen our house and the
tr,ro neighbors noted above. Ttrq residents across the streets are .in tallen
bui idllgs thdn_-.1.h9- progosed,. ne,u level and should not be af fected by this
aEa-iti"n. I"-;.J, I feel that reliEF fnon the strict int€rpr€tation of
the G.R.F.fl, requinenent is necesaary in this case if I an to receive equal
treatnqent as a number of other sites in ny vicinity'\--4
Thank you for youn consideration in this matter.