Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVAIL VALLEY FILING 1 BLOCK 3 LOT 18 LEGAL.pdfCGI*IJHIY CEIELOHTE*{T Planning and Environmental Commisson ACTIOH FORM Depaftment of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 ' tel:970,479.2135 tax.970"479.2452 web: www.vailgov.com Project Name: STEPHENSON VARIANCE Project Description: Participanb: Project Address: Legal Description: Parcel Number: Comments: PEC Number: PEC050047 VARIANCES FOR SETBACK, SITE COVEMGE AND GRFA owNER STEPHENSON, ROBERT H. &ANNE05/01/2005 1042 WOODRUFF PUNTATION PKVVY MARIETTA GA 30067 APPUCANT SNOWDON AND HOPKINS, ARCHTTE06/01/2005 Phone: 970476-2201 PO BOX 3340 VAIL co 81658 License: C000001763 ARCHITECT SNOWDoN AND HOPKINS, ARCHITE06/01/2005 Phone:970-476-2201 PO BOX 3340 VAIL co 81558 License: C000001763 12148 VAIL VALLEY DR VAIL Locationi 1448 VAIL VALLEY DRIVE LoE 18 Block: 3 Subdivision: VAIL VALLEY 2t0t-092-070r-7 BOARD/STAFF ACTION Motion By: Second By: Vote: Gonditions: Viele Bernhardt 4-1 Action: DENIED Date of Approval: Cond: 8 (PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s). Cond: 300 PEC approval shall not be not become valid for 20 days following the date of approval. Cond: CON0007155 Building needs review by Building Department for determination of the number of stories. Basements over 15oo sq ft may require fire sprinkler system. Four story wood frame buildings must have a fire sprinkler system. Planner: Bill Gibson PEC Fee Paid: $500.00 ru,;ffi Rezonrng $1300 Major Subdivision $1500 Minor Subdivisjon $650 Exemption Plat $650 Minor Arnendment to anSDD $1000 New Sp€cial Development District $6000 Major Amendment to an SDD $6000 MajorAmendment to an SDD $1250 (no exte ior n odifications) Description of the Request: Application for Review by the Planning and Environmental Commission Department of Community Development 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.245? web: www.vail90v.com General I nformation: Aii projects requiring Planning and Environmental Commission review must receive approval prio. to submitting a buildir'rg permit appucation. Please refer lo the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. An applic€tion ioa Planning and EnvironflBntal Comnrission review cannot be accepted until all required information is received by the Community Development Department- The poject may also need to be reviewed by the Town Council and/or the Design Review Board- Type of Application and Fee: . Conditional Use Permit . FloodplainModification . Mlnor Extsrior Alteration . Major Exterior Alteration . Developmenl Plan . Amenoment to a Development Plan - Zoninq Code Amendment '\.variarice . Sign Variance $650 $400 $650 $800 $1500 $250 $1300 $500 $200 a, tt:. J n 0 3 0 (v Physical Address: Parcel No.: zonin s : A-wa-fHLW -@ @l fl ^ L- Name(s) of Owner(s): Mailing Address: E-mail Address: (Coniact Eagle Co. Assessof at 970-328-8640 fof parcel no.) Mailing Addres,s:oofuPu ffi Ptt*l.l T*f to N PAFVU* Owner(s) Signature(s): Name of Applicant: Page I of G04l0l/04 "t S.*" { ,; \.\t ,t if t. 4.1 t- TO: FROM; DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Vail Town Council Department of Community Development September 6, 2005 An appeal, pursuantto Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 12- 6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapler 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at '1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC050047) Appellant Vail Town Council Planner: Bill Gibson SUBJECT PROPERW The subject property is located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 1 8, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1 . STANDING OF APPELLANT The appellant, Vail Town Council, has standing to.call-up" anydecision of the Planning.and Environmental Commission, pursuant to Section 12-3-3, Appeals, Vail Town Code. REQUIRED ACTION The Vail Town Council shall uphold, overturn, or modify the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 12{C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, DensityControl, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuantto Chapter 12-17 , Yaiances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Pursuant to Sub-section 12-3-3-C5, Vail Town Code, the Town Council is required to make findings of fact in accordance with the Vail Town Code: *The Town Council sha!! on al! appeals make specific findings of fact based direcdy on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact must support conclusions thatthe standards and conditions imposed by the requiremenfs of thrs title (i.e. TiAe 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code) have or have notbeen met." BACKGROUND On June 27 , 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission held a public hearing to consider an application for a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition at 1448 Vail Valley Drive. The applicant's proposal included a garage, bedroom, bathroom, elevator, and entry addition. This item was discussed by the Commission and tabled for further discussion at a future public hearing. ll. |il. tv. V. The applicant subsequentlyamended the application byeliminating the proposed bedroom and bathroom. The applicant's amended application was reviewed bythe Commission at its July25,2005, public hearing. Based upon the evidence and testimony presented, the Planning and Environmental Commission determined that the proposed variance application met the criteria for review outlined in Chapter 12-17, Yariances, Vail Town Code, and the Commission approved the application for a variance from Section 12-6C€, Setbacks, Section 1 2-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. At its August 2,2005, public hearing the Vail Town Council "called-up" this Planning and Environmental Commission decision. Excerpts from the Staff memorandums to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated June 27 and July 25, 2005 (see Attachment A and C) and the associated Planning and Environmental Commission meeting results (see Attachment B and D) have been attached for reference. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS OF THE TOWN CODE Chaoter 12-3. Administration and Enforcement (in oart) Section 12-3-3: Appeals (in part) C. Appeal Of Planning And Environmental Commission Decisions And Design Rev i ew B o a rd Decisrbns.' 1. Authority: The Town Council shall have the authorityto hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission or the Design Review Board with respect to the provisions of this Tiile and the standards and procedures hereinafter set forth. 2. Initiation: An appeal may be initiated by an applicant, adjacent propefi owner, or any aggrieved or adversely affected person ftom any order, decision, determination or interpretation by the Planning and Environmen6l Commission or the Design Review Bioard with respect to this Title. "Aggrieved or adversely affected person' means any person who will suffer an adverse effectto an interest protected orfurthered by this Title. The alleged adverse interestmay be shared in common with other members of the community at large, but shall exceed in degree the general interest in community good shared by all persons. The Administratorshall determine the standing of an appellanL lf the appellantobjects to the Adminisfrafor's determination of standing, the Town Council shall, at a meeting prior to hearing evidence on the appeal, make a determination as to the standing of the appellant. lf the Town Council determines thatthe appellant does not have standing to bring an appeal, the appeal shall not be heard and the original actign or determination stands. The Town Council may also call up a decision af the Planning and Environmental Commission or the Design Review Board by a majority vote of those Council nembers presenL 5. Findings: The Town Council shall on all appeals make specific findings of fact based direcily on the particular evidence presented to iL These findings of fact must support conclusrbns that the standards and conditions mposed by the requirements of this Title have or have not been net. Chaoter 12-17 Variance (in oart) Section 12-17-1: PURPOSE: A. Reasons for Seeking Variance: ln order to prevent or fo /essen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsis{enf wilh the objectives of this title as would resultfrom strict or litenl interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations maybe granted. A practical difficultyorunnecessary physical hardship may resultfrom the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limihtions,steetlocations orconditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of stict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. Section 12-17-6: CRITERIA AND FINDINGS: A. Factors Enumerated: Before acting on a variance application, the planning and environmental commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested vaiance: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the icinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve conpatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites rn the vicinity, or to aftain the objectives of this litle without grant of special pivilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on tight and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the Proqosed vaiance. B. Necessary Findings: The planning and environmentalcommission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constifute a grant of special privilege inconsstent wifh the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. 2. That the granting of the vaiance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injuious to propefties or improvements in the vicinity. vt. 3. That the vaiance is varranted for one or ffDre of the following reasons.. a. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specrfed regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship rnconsistenf with the objectives of this title. b. There are exceptional or extnodinary circurnstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the saffE zone. c. The strict or litenl interprctation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the sarrc district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Setback Variance The Community Development Department recommends the Vail Town Council upholds the Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Vaif Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residentialaddition, located at 1448 VailValley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, VailVillage Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto On an appeal, the Town Council shall make specificfindings of fact based directly on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact must support conclusions that the standards and conditions imposed by the requirements of Title 12,Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Gode, have or have not been met Should the Town Council choose to uphold the Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1; the Community Development Department recommends the Town Council make the following findings: "1. The granting of this variance will not consflfute a granting of speciat pivilege inconsistent with the limitations on other propefties c/assifed in the Two-Family Residential District, since a similar setback vaiance for a garage addition to this residence was approved by the Town of Vail in 1991 as fuftrer discussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. 2. The granting of this vaiance witl not be detrimenta! to the public health, safety, or welfare, or nateially injurious to propefties or inprovements in the vicinity. 3. Ihis variance is warranted for the fotlouing reasons.' a. The strictliteral interpretatiot orenforcementof the specifred regulationwould result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hadship inconsistentwith the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, due to the configuration of the existing structure on the sife. Additionally, a similar setback variance for a garage addition to this residence was apprcved by the Town of Vail in 1991 as further discussed tn the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumsfances orconditions applicable to the same site of he variance that do not apply generally to other propefties in the same district, due to the configuration of the existing structure on the site. Additionally, a similar setback vaiance for a garage addition to this resrdence was apprcved by the Town of Vail in 1991 as fufther drscussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by heowners of other properties in the same district, due to the configuration of the existing structure on the site. Additionally, a similar setback variance for a garage addition to thr's resrdence was approved by the Town of Vail in 1991 as further dlscussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005.' Site Coveraoe Variance The Community Development Department recommends the Vail Town Council overturns the Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section l 2-6C-9, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard lhereto. On an appeal, the Town Council shall make specific findings of fact based directly on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact must support conclusions that the standards and conditions imposed by the requirements of Title 12,Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, have or have not been met. Should the Town Council choose to overturn the Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, VailVillage Filing 1;the Community Development Department recommends the Town Council make the following findings: "1. The granting of this variance will constitute a granting of special privilege rnconslsfent with the limitations on other prcperfies c/assifred in the Two-Family Residential Distrtct, since a garage addition can be constructed in conformance with the site coverage limits and those proposed additions rn excess of the site coverage limits also exceed fhe gross residential floor area /rmits as further discussed in the Staff memonndum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or nateially injurious to properties or inprovements in the vicinity. 3. Ihrb variance is notwananted for thefoltowing reasons: a. The strictliteral interpretatim orenforcementof the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship rnconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, since a ' garage addition can be constructed in conformance with the site coverage limits and those proposed additions,n excess of the site coverage timits also ,r""r,d fhe gross residential floor area /rmifs as further discussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated Juty 25, 2005. b. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district, stnce a garage addition can be constructed in conformance with the site coverage limits and fhose proposed additions in excess of the site coverage limits also exceed the grcss residential floor area /rmits as further drscussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not depive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other propefties in the same district srnce a garage addition can be constructed in conformance with the site coverage limits and fhose propose d additions ln excess the srte coverage limits also exceed the gross residential floor area limits as fufther discussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005" Densitv Control (i.e. GRFA) Variance The Community Development Department recommends the Vail Town Council overturns the Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 1 2-6C-8, Density Control, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 1 2-17,Yaiances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 1 8, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. On an appeal, the Town Council shall make specific findings of fact based directly on the particular evidence presented to it. These findings of fact must support conclusions that the standards and conditions imposed bythe requirements of Title 12,Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, have or have not been met. Should the Town Council choose to overturn the Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, Vail Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1; the Community Development Department recommends the Town Council make the following findings: "1. The granting of this vaiance will constitute a granting of speciat privilege tnconslsfent with the limitations on other properfi'es c/assd?ed in the Two-Family Residential District, since the residence was originally constructed under Town of Vailjuisdiction with Town of Vail design review approval, fhe gross residentialfloor area regulations were amended in August of 2004 to increase the size limits for sfrucfures within the Two-Family Residential District and the existing residence exceeds these limits, and the proposed additions rn excess of the gross residential floor area limits also exceed the site coverage limits as furtherdiscussed rn fhe Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or inprovements in the vicinity. vil. 3. This variance is not wananted for the folloning reasons.' a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsr'stenf with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, since the residence was originally constructed under Town of Vail juisdiction with Town of Vail design review approvaf fhe gross residenilal floor area regula$ons were amended in August of 2004 to lncrease the sin Iimits for structures within the Two-Family Residential District and the existing residence exceeds fhese /rmifs, and the prcposed additions rh excess of the gross resldential floor area limits also exceed fhe site coverage limits as further dlscussed in the Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25,2005. b. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the vaiance thatdo not apply generally to other propefties in the same district, since the residence was originally constructed u nder Town of Vail juisdiction with Town of Vail design review approval, the gross residential floor area regulations were amended in August of 2004 to increase the size limits for structures within he Two-Family Residential District and the existing residence exceeds these limits, and the proposed additions in excess of fhe gross residential floor area limits also exceed fhe sife coverage limits as further discussed ln fhe Staff memorandum to the Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district, since the residence was oiginally constructed under Town of Vail jurisdiction with Town of Vail design review approval, the gross resrUential floor area regulations were amended in August of 2004 to increase the size limits for stuctures within he Two-Family Residential District and the exisfing residence exceeds these limits, and the proposed additions rn excess of fhe gross residential floor area limits also exceed fhe site coverage [imits as further discussed rn the Staff memonndum to he Planning and Environmental Commission dated July 25, 2005." ATTACHMENTS June 27, 2005, Planning and Environmental Commission memorandum June27,2005, Planning and Environmental Commission meeting results July 25, 2005, Planning and Environmental Commission memorandum July 25, 2005, Planning and Environmental Commission meeting results Public Notice A. B. c. D. E. Attachment: A TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Community Development Department June 27,2005 A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1 , and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC05-0047) Applicant Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects Planner; Bill Gibson SUMMARY The applicants, Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects, are requesting a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Varianceb, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, VailVillage Filing 1. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of the setback variance request; approval, with conditions, of the site coverage variance request; and denial of the GRFA variance request subject to the findings noted in Section lX of this memorandum. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST The applicants, Robert Stephenson, Jr, and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects, are proposing to construct a garage addition to Units 18A (Stephenson) and 188 (Schofield); plus a new entry, elevator, and bedroom addition to Unit 18A. The new garage addition will widen the existing three car garage to the west to create a four car garage (two spaces per dwelling unit). Above this garage addition the applicant is proposing to construct a new 272 sq. ft. bedroom and bathroom. To the west of the proposed garage addition the applicant is proposing to construct a new 110 sq. ft. single-story front entry room with a 42 sq. ft. three-story elevator addition. The applicant is also proposing to widen the existing driveway and construct a new exterior stair from the driveway to the third-floor entry to Unit 18A. The proposed garage addition to Units 18A and 188 encroaches into the front setback and exceeds the allowable site coverage for this property. The proposed entry and elevator on Unit 18A exceed both site coverage and GRFA, and the bedroom addition also exceeds the allowable GRFA. il. lll. A vicinity map (Attachment A), site photographs (Attachment B), a more detailed description of the applicant's request (Attachments C), and the proposed architectural plans (Attachment D) have been attached for reference. BACKGROUND This two-family residence was originally approved by the Design Review Board in 1976 and construction was completed in 1978. The original approved architectural plans blend the overlapping garage level (finished floor elevation 8267') and the mechanical level (finished floor elevation 8277') into one "basement plan" even though these levels are separated by a floor-to-floor measurement of 10 feet. According to the Town of Vail's records, this structure was originally allowed 5,261 sq. ft. of GRFA. However, 5,491 sq. ft. of GRFA was constructed and a final certificate of occupancy was issued. Therefore, in 1978 this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA by 230 sq. ft, lt is unclear how the GRFA was calculated for this structure at that time. At some point in time a party wall was constructed to separate the garage level parking spaces, and a portion of the garage level located directly below the storage ioom on the mechanical level was converted from a parking space into a storage room (i.e. GRFA). On June 24, 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Even though the Town's GRFA regulations had been amended several times since 1978, GRFA calculations were not done at the time of this variance approval. ln 1999, allowed and existing GRFA calculations were conducted. According to Town of Vail records, the allowable GRFA in 1999 for this lot was 5,205 sq. ft., plus each unit was eligible for one "250 Addition" for a total of 5,705 sq. ft. However, the existing GRFA calculations (including a "250 Addition" for the Schofield residence) were 6,393 sq. ft. Therefore in 1999, this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA calculations by 1,188 sq. ft. and 688 sq. ft. when two "250 Additions' were included in the calculations. lt is unclear how the GRFA was calculated in 1999, but it appears that no portion of the garage level or mechanical level (shown on a single "basement plan" drawing) was counted as GRFA; even though the entire mechanical level qualified as GRFA and the unapproved garage level storage room also qualified as GRFA. Recalculating the garage and mechanical levels using 'l 999 GRFA methods, the structure has 7,500 sq. ft. of GRFA. Therefore, in 1999 this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA (plus two "250 Additions") by 1,795 sq. ft. In 2004, the Town's GRFA regulations were again amended. Under these new regulations, this property is now allowed 7,286 sq. fl. of GRFA. The existing structure, including the appropriate portions of the garage level and the appropriate portions of the mechanical level, has 8,801 sq. ft. of GRFA. The existing structure exceeds today's allowable GRFA by 1,515 sq. ft. The applicant is currently proposing to add an additional 466 sq, ft. of bedroom, entry, and elevator GRFA, thus proposing to exceed the current GRFA limits by 1,981 sq. ft. (approximately 27o/o). This proposal is scheduled for review by the Design Review Board at its July 6, 2005, public hearing. tv.ROLES OF REVIEWTNG BOprEg Order of Review: Generally, variance applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission, and then any accompanying design review application will be reviewed by the Design Review Board. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a variance application, in accordance with Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a variance application. However, the Design Review Board is responsible for the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of any accompanying design review application. Town Gouncil: The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a.decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Desion Review Board. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials for completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Code. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff believes that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS Article 12-6C: Two-Family Residential (R) District (in part) 12-6C-1: PURPOSE: The two-family residential district is intended to provide sites for low density single-family or two-family residential uses, fogefher with such public facilities as rnay be appropriately located in the same district. The two-family residential district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate witi singte- family and two-family occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of such sifes by establishing appropriate site development standards. V. 12-6C-6: SEIBACKS: In the R district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum side setback shall be fifteen feet (15'), and the minimum rear setback shall be fifteen feet (15'). 1 2-6C-8 : DENS/IY CONTROL: A. Dwelling Unds: Nof more than a totat of two (2) dwetling units shatl be permitted on each site with only one dwelling unit permifted on existing /ofs /ess than foufteen thousand (14,000) square feet. B. Gross Residential Floor Area: 1. The following gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be pennitted on each site: a. Not more than forty gix ft6) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of the first ten thousand (10,000) square feet of site area; plus b. Thirty eight (38) square feet of gross resrUential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area over ten thousand (10,000) square feet, not exceeding fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet of site area; plus c. Thifteen (13) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area over fifteen thousand (15,000) square feel not exceeding thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of site area; plus d. Six (6) square feet of gross resrdential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area in excess of thitty thousand (30,000) square feet. 1 2-6C-9:'S|TE CaVERAG E: Site coverage shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total site area. Chapter 12-17'. Yariances (in part) 12-17-1 : Purpose: A. Reasons for Seeking Variance: ln orderto prevent orto /essen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimenslons of a site or the location of existing sfructures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. . VI. SITE ANALYSTS Address: 1448 Vail Valley Drive Legal Description: Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1 Zoning: Two-Family Residential Land Use Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Current Land Use: Two-Family Dwelling Lot Size: 21,045 sq. ft. (0.48 acres) Standard Allowed/Required Existinq Proposed Setbacks (min):Front 29ft. 20 ft. 17 fr..Sides 15 ft. 29ft.121ft. 22ft.1 21ft.Rear: 15 ft. 53 ft. no change Height (max.): 30 ft./33 ft. Density (max): 2 dwellings 2 dwellings no change GRFA (max): 7,286 sq. ft. 8,801 sq. ft. 9,270 sq. ft. (++Se sq.ft.) Site coverage (max.): 4,209 sq. ft. 3,843 sq. ft. 4,488 sq. ft. (+S+S sq.ft.) Landscape Area (min.): 12,627 sq. fl. Parking (min.): 18A (West) 4 4 (2 enclosed) 4 (2 enclosed) 18B (East) 3 2 (1 enclosed)4 (2 enclosed) VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zonino North: Residential Two-Family Residential South: Mixed Use N/A (White River National Forest)East: Residential Two-Family Residential West Residential Two-Family Residential VIII. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by Chapter 12-16, Vail Town Code. A. Consideration of Factors Reoardinq Variances: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. This proposed addition is associated with a remodel of an existing residence originally approved by the Design Review Board in 1976 with construction completed in 1978. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition that, due to the orientation of the structure to the property line and Vail Valley Drive, encroaches three feet into the required 20 foot front setback. In 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed 2. setback variance for this proposed garage addition will not Oe Oetrimentat to the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. This proposed garage aOdition'will cause the structure to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage for this property. However, the proposed garage addition will increase the existing three car garage to a four car garage (two spaces for each dwelling unit) which is one the Town's development objectives encouraged by the Town's zoning regulations. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed site coverage variance necessary for this garage addition will not be detrimental to the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. This existing residence currently exceeds the allowable GRFA for this site by 1,506 sq. ft., which is 21o/o GRFA than is allowed for other residences in the same zone district. The applicant is proposing the addition of a new entry, elevator, and bedroom that will further increase the non- conformity of this property. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request; the structure will exceed the allowable GRFA by '1,972 sq. ft. This is 27% more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in this same zone district. Staff does not believe deviations from the GRFA regulations to this degree are in keeping with the bulk/mass and general character of the Two-Family zone district. Therefore, Staff does not believe the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom are in keeping with the bulUmass and general character of the neighboring properties. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition that, due to the orientation of the structure to the property line and Vail Valley Drive, encroaches three feet into the required 20 foot front setback. ln 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed setback variance is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the Town's development objectives. As the Planning and Environmental Commission has historically approved several similar setback variance requests, Staff does not believe approval of this request will constiiute a grant of special privilege. This proposed garage addition will cause the structure to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage for this property. However, the proposed garage addition will increase the existing three car garage to a four car garage (two spaces for each dwelling unit) which is one the B. Town's development objectives encouraged by the Town's zoning regulations. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed site coverage variance necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the Town's development objectives. As the Planning and Environmental Commission has historically approved several similar setback variance requests, Staff does not believe approval of this request will constitute a grant of special privilege. This existing residence currently exceeds the allowable GRFA for this site by 1,515 sq. ft.; which is 21o/o more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in the same zone district. The applicant is proposing the addition of a new entry, elevator, and bedroom that will further increase the non-conformity of this property. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request; the structure will exceed the allowable GRFA by 1,981 sq. ft. This is 27o/o more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in this same zone district. Staff does not believe deviations from the GRFA regulations to this degree are in keeping with the bulUmass and general character of the Two-Family zone district. Therefore, Staff does not believe the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom are in keeping with the bulUmass and general character of the neighboring properties. Staff also believes approval of the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom would be a grant of special privilege. As this property already exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA, so does not believe a further increase is appropriate. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff does not believe this proposal will have a significant impact on the public health, safety or welfare, public facilities, utilities, or light and air in comparison to existing conditions of the site. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. The design review application associated with this proposal is tentatively scheduled for review by the Town of Vail Design Review Board at its July 6, 2005, public hearing. The Planninq and Environmental Commission shall make the followinq findinqs before qrantinq a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. tx. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone.c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. STAFF REGOMMENDATION Setback Variance The Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Variances, Vail Town Code, to allowfora residential addition, located at1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Developmenl Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmenta! Commission approves the appticantb reguest for a variance from Sectlon 12-6C-6, Setbackg pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and sefting forth details in regard thereto, subject to the following condition: 1. This approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the design review application assocrated with this variance request. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes' the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege rnconsrstent with the limitations on other properties c/assfed in the Two-Family Residential DistricL 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to propefties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. Ihis variance is warranted for the following reasons.' a. The strict literal interpretation o, "niorr"rrnt of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or ertraordinary circumstances or condffions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same distict. c. The strict interpretation-or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same distict. Site Coveraoe Variance The Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicanf's request for a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting fotth details in regard thereto, subject to the following condition: 1. This approval shall only be for the approximately 124 sq. ft. of additional site coverage necessary for the construction of the proposed garage addition, The additional site coverage granted by this variance shall not be used fo accommodate the construction of anv other addition to this structure. 2. This approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the design review application assocr'ated with this variance request. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission fnds: 1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties c/assrfed in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. This vaiance is warranted for the following reasons.' a. The strict titerat interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difftculty or unnecessary physical hardship rnconsisfenf with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the vaiance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same districL Densitv Control Variance The Community Development Department recommends dgnial of a variance from Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission denles the applicant's reguest for a variance from Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: l0 The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The granting of this variance will constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties c/assfied in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this vaiance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or mateially injurious to propefties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. Ihts variance is warranted for the following reasons.' a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difftculty or unnece,ssary physical hardship nconsisfenf with the objectives of Tiile 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. c. The stict interpretation or enforce'ment of the specified regulation would not depive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same districL ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant's Request C. Site Photographs D. Architectural Plans E. Public Hearing Notice 11 Attachment: B The duplex on Lot 18 was built in 1976. The owner of 18A is proposing to enlarge the very small 3-car garage for 18A (2 spaces) and 188 (1 space), add a ground level entry with elevator and a guest bedroom. This proposal requires 3 variances: FRONT SETBACKVARIANCE The owner of 18A, with full support of the owner of 18B, is proposing expanding the existing 681 .9 sq. ft. 3-car garage (2 cars for 18A and 1 car for 1 88) to 1 ,176.12 sq. ft. for 4 cars. This addition meets the Town of Vail parking standards for 2ar garage per unit. This addition requires the cooperation sf both owners and due to the existing garage location, there is no other altemative for expanding. This variance is for the northeast comer of the existing garage, expanding 2.5 feet to the north. This increases the garage depth from 20 feet to 22.5 feet. a. This variance improves the use for today's larger cars and updates the use and appearance of the existing structure. The upgrades.are in keeping with neighborhood standards.b. There is no other location for the garage expansion. c. There is no effect on light and air.d. This is exactly what the Town of Vail planning policies and development objectives encourages. SITE COVERAGE VARIANCE: for 279.25 sq. ft. Lot 18 allowable site coverage Lot 18 proposed site coverage Variance 4,209 sq. ft. 4.488.25 sq. ft. 279.25 sq. ft. The proposal includes 155 sq. ft. for an entry and elevator for 18A and 490 sq. ft. for the garage addition. This variance improves the use and appearance of the existing structure. The expanded garage meets the Town of Vail parking standards and achieves compatibility with the neighborhood. This variance does not affect light and air. This variance meets the Town of Vail parking standards and complies with the intent of the Town of Vail planning policies and development objectives. P0 Box 3340 o Vail, Colorado 81658 . Phone:970-476-2201 . Fax: 970-476-749 1 a. b. c. d. GRFAVARIANCE: for 1,830.59 sq. ft. GRFA Existing GRFAfor 18A and 188 8,647.44 sq. ft. Allowable GRFA 7,285.85 sq. ft. Proposed GRFAfor 18A and 188 9,116344 sq. ft. This duplex has two levels below grade; the garage level and the mechanical room level. The mechanical level is completely below grade. This level should not be included in the GRFA calculations under the new Town of Vail planning objectives. 18A Mechanical Level GRFA 521.2 sq. ft. 188 Mechanical Level GRFA '1.272.6 sg' ft. 1,793.8 sq. ft. should be deleted This would leave a 36.2 sq. ft. (1,830.5 [requested variance] - 1,793.8 sq. ft.) GRFA for development improvement to a 3O-year old building for a ground level entry (the existing is 2 levels up) and a new elevator and new guest room. a. This variance request would have been included in the old 250 sq. ft. variance for a non-conforming building. The remodeling and improvements of this property is in keeping with the other structures in the vicinity.b. This variance and interpretation of the mechanical level is in keeping with the intention of the Town of Vail planning objectives and the Town of Vail's encouragement of upgrading 3O-year old properties. c. This variance does not affect light and air.d. THIS IS EXACTLY THE INTENT OF THE NEW TOWN OF VAIL PLANNING POLICIES AND DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES. Ei go oa EgFE 6i bE =E Ei ;:li F:33 ,! lr; tit li.I$ llt |lt li! llr Ei ljrl I:iE r!il Attachment: I' lr [! [8 il,'iiiri$lli$,ffift 3'sl 9l , !El iE[r I t\ !l il 1\'ri l r[r I tr iii iie ;lii 'h Yi -' ii t,,is k' li \t 'Y"' ll \1\ I + r k'.r' tl i -ffi1, =".i : !\'. i; :I!r if ?''' ' \u"i >?\\ '\ l! t' -'^rr | 9l li'= air| .r.J.Fo !A 'I d '.|..qqrrv . r4#oH Frs uoPe€ oowo]oc "ltv^ 9Nt'il1 rsutJ A3't'lvn 'llvn'e y30]s '8! lo'I NOll100V 3CN30|S3U NOSNSHdf, IS I -l a I f{ l.r F 4l tl trl $l $l \s & X I _l !r n' A f t s ) s aart.F.to!^l€.tlt ata 'c d '!.qlFrY . t!Fq{ Fle uo9r'ot6 oovuo]o9 "ilv^ 9Nl-tH Isutj A3'l'rv^ lvn'c yco'rs 'g! lo'l NOUTOOV SCNeOtSf U NOSN3Hd3TS f t {l E lr' |lt i4 i$ $t ri -+ $i ci tar -l ET €t _(.L I I t_ ,l ;i trl --sft ili t {T * I t t t 9- -]* - -.-,8 r||rtarrYr r4.uloll 6tt pt o a '3 d 'lLlqcJv. n4tFol{ P(lt $DN.ls oovuo]o3'ltv^ gNtlH lsutJ A3]-IVA -ilVA'e yCOl8 '8t IOl NO|I100V tCN:tOtS3U NOSNllHdtrs I s *iut '|{rl I !o" fl$Nl ' |lor,.Fja r 'ca 'l.ourprv . r!{@H p|i€ riocridis oovuolo9'-ilv^ 9Nl'ltJ lsull A3'r-rv^ lrv^'8)|30-rs 'gt lo'l NO|I|OOV 3CN30|S3U NOSNSHdf, rS ll I it {.1 + ih Ilt Il I + TL rl{tl ll + tf !t i i ii i-r rr- -r i i il f-] n-- i --. I l\ & sl Fi \i 'l -l EI s-l qI .-l tl f_l tl fl * fl tl rDl,artrv/r&n>04 !r{r-aor '5d H$rY. ri?Fq{ B,t us.lous oovuo'loc"ltv^I | | eNf-rfrrsutJ A311v ltvn,Eyoo]s .81 lo'l \ffi12'| NO|I|OOV 39N3O|S3U NOSN3t{d:trS | .--- *1 | ! l-s |{ -l 6i $i \l \\l .t s-l \ll I ZI I Fi trl! ts: --6- I :- I rarl.tl'li/ airl.tF5r^rsanr.laa 6-aoa '5 d !.qiprv r ruqdofl F !.Fxot s oovuolo3'rv I oNrru rsurr Arlrv rvn'c ycore ,sr joj lwfi*al o- Norloov3gN3orssu NosN3Hdsrs 1.1!a--# q 3l rl I t! ti {f r$i \ B: $- I I 'al $l t 'q; tl t -I rl ? oI $i \i \l \t \ i$aFlFa r rG.ria m-.od 'C d 'tF.,tFrt t lllflPoH Pr loFnoqs oovuo-toc "ltvn gNr-lll lsull A3'llv^ lrv^ 'c xcol8 '81 to-l NO|IIOOV f 9N!O|SAU NOSNSI{d3IS il T rl tl t I -l ql .l €- I I I \ \ {l t, Fi *i .l + /-1\v7 t ln l.rF fl! iqrrl THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of lhe Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with section 12-3-6, Vail rown code, on June 27, 2005, at 2:00 pm, in the Town of vail Municipal Building, in consideration of: A request for a final review of an amended final plat, pursuant.to chapter 13-12, Exemption Plat Review Procedures, Vail rown code, to aliow for an amenoment to an . existing platted building envelope, located at 1463 Aspen Grove Lane/Lot gB, Lion's Ridge Filing 4, and setting forth details in regard thereto.Applicant: Robert and Kristine selby, represented by John Martin Architect, LLc Planner: Bill Gibson A request for final review of a floodplain modification, pursuant to chapter 14-6, Grading standards, Vail Town code, to allow for the bridge reconstruction, located at the Westhaven Drive Bridge and Pedestrian/Skier Bridge (a more complete description is available at the Department of Community Development offices); and setting fortfi details in regard thereto. Applicant Cascade Village Metropolitan District, represented by Lonco, Inc.Planner: Bill Gibson . r. ., A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12- fiil>6c-8, Density control, and section 12-6c-9, site coverage, pursuant to chapter 12-17, -lql7,Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for b residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley -', .. Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, VailVillage Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. l$lu Attachment E Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects BillGibson ,Applicant: Plannen . A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to section 1z-7H4, Permitted and conditional Uses; second Floor and Above, Vail rown code, to allow for , a professional office and studio, located at 450 East Lionshead Circle (Treetops Building), Lot 6, Vail Lionshead Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto.Applicant Vail Resorts, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.Plannen Bill Gibson A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-gC-3, Parking, Vail Town Code, to allow for a revision to the approved parking plan at the Vail Valley Medical Center, located at 181 East Meadow Drive/Lots E and F, Vail Village Filing 2,,and setting forth details in regard thereto.Applicant Vail Valley Medical Center, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, LLC Planner: Matt Gennett Attachment: B PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING June 27,2005 (Excerpt) 5. A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail ValleyDrive/Lot18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. ApplicantRobert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Tabled to July 11, 2005 VOTE:6-0-0 MOTION: Viele SECOND: Kjesbo Bill Gibson presented the project according to the memorandum. Pam Hopkins introduced the project. She explained the scope, background, and reasoning for project. John Schofield further explained the variance requests, adding that some discrepancy regarding the GRFA could be related to the fact that the methods for calculating GRFA within the Town have changed many times. He commented that a similar setback variance had been granted for this lot and similar site coverage and GRFA variances had been approved for other lots. He explained how he believed the below grade portions of the house should not count as GRFA. No public comment was added. Bill Jewitt commented that he was in opposition to constructing an additional bedroom through a GRFA variance. Regarding the lowest level basement argument, he mentioned his support of changing the GRFA regulations. However, Regardless, his opposition to a GRFA variance remains. Regarding site coverage, he had some difficulty in determining the hardship that was used to constitute a variance from the regulations. Rollie Kjesbo agreed that any square footage below grade should not be calculated as GRFA. However, the currently non-conforming state of the residence's GRFA should not allow a variance for further non-conformity. Regarding the site coverage variance request, the fact that the residence was built within the Town of Vail negated a request for such a variance. George Lamb agreed with the Commissioners who had already spoken, stating his faith in Staffs calculations. In terms of site coverage, he expressed interest in site coverage variances which were granted to properties that were built in the Town and according to Town regulations. The parking situation would be improved by the construction of a garage, however. He was in favor of some solution, but thought that it should not include increased GRFA. . David Viele commented that he was not necessarily in agreement with the new GRFA regulations. However, the applicant did not show a hardship that warranted a variance from such regulations. Chas Bernhardt commented that he would like to see the item tabled and proposed somewhat differently at the following meeting. John schofield added that perhaps simply an entry elevator and a garage could remain a part of the proposal. Bill Gibson clarified that the elevator would be calculated as GRFA on each level of the structure. Bill Jewitt commented that the GRFA request may be more palatable if the site coverage variance was eliminated. Pam Hopkins replied lhat one of the Town's wishes was to enclose parked vehicles. John Schofield said that site coverage was available upon the lot for a garage and the entry elevator. Doug Cahill asked if the applicant would be willing to table the item, to which the applicant replied affi rmatively. TO: FROM: DATE; SUBJECT: Attachment: C MEMORANDUM Planning and Environmental Commission Community Development Department July 25, 2005 A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residentjal addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 1 8, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1 , and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC05-0047) r Applicant: Planner: Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects BillGibson il. SUMMARY The applicants, Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects, are requesting a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-GC-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- '17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3; Vail Village Filing 1. Based upon Staffs review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of the setback variance request; denial, of the site coverage variance request; and denial of the GRFA variance request subject to the findings noted in Section lX of this memorandum. DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST On June 20, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the applicants' proposal to construct a garage addition and widen the driveway for Units 18A (Stephenson) and 18B (Schofield); plus construct a new entry, elevator, and bedroom addition and a new exterior stair case for Unit 18A. This previous proposal required variances from the setback, site coverage, and GRFA standards of the Two-Family Residential District. The Commission was generally supportive of the setback variance request; however, the Commission was not favorable toward the requested GRFA and site coverage variances. Since that meeting, the applicant has amended the proposal by eliminating the proposed bedroom addition and extending the elevator to all floors of the building. The applicants, Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects, are proposing to construct a garage addition to Units 18A (Stephenson) and 188 (Schofield); plus a new entry and elevator addition to Unit 18A. The new garage addition will widen the existing three car garage to the west to create a four car garage (two spaces per dwelling unit). To the west of the proposed garage 1il. addition the applicant is proposing to construct a new 100 sq. ft. single-story front entry room with a 45 sq. ft. five-story elevator addition (total of 225 sq.ft.). The applicant is also proposing to widen the existing driveway and construct a new exterior stair from the driveway to the third-floor entry to Unit 18A. The applicant is requesting a 2/z encroachment into the front setback, a GRFA variance for an additional 325 sq. ft. (the structure cunently exceeds the allowable GRFA limits), and a site coverage variance for an additional 129 sq. ft. The applicant's revised architectural drawings have been attached for reference (Attachment A). BACKGROUND This two-family residence was originally approved by the Design Review Board in 1976 and construction was completed in 1978, The original approved architectural plans bfend the overlapping garage level (finished floor elevation 8267') and the mechanical fevel (finished floor elevation 8277') into one "basement plan" even though these levels are separated by a floor-to-floor measurement of 10 feet. According to the Town of Vail's records, this structure was originally allowed 5,261 sq. ft. of GRFA. However, 5,49'l sq. ft. of GRFA was constructed and a final certificate of occupancy was issued. Therefore, in 1978 this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA by 230 sq. ft. lt is unclear how the GRFA was calculated for this structure at that time. At some point in time a party wall was constructed to separate the garage level parking spaces, and a portion of the garage level located directly below the storage room on the mechanical level was converted from a parking space into a storage room (i.e. GRFA). On June 24, 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Even though the Town's GRFA regulations had been amended several times since 1978, GRFA calculations were not done at the time of this variance approval. In 1999, allowed and existing GRFA calculations were conducted. According to Town of Vail records, the allowable GRFA in 1999 for this lot was 5,205 sq. ft., plus each unit was eligible for one "250 Addition" for a total of 5,705 sq. ft. However, the existing GRFA calculations (including a "250 Addition" for the Schofield residence) were 6,393 sq. ft. Therefore in 1999, this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA calculations by 1,'188 sq. ft. and 688 sq. ft. when two "250 Additions" were included in the calculations. lt is unclear how the GRFA was calculated in 1999, but it appears that no portion of the garage level or mechanical level (shown on a single "basement plan" drawing) was counted as GRFA; even though the entire mechanical level qualified as GRFA and the unapproved garage level storage room also qualified as GRFA. Recalculating the garage and mechanical levels using 1999 GRFA methods, the stiucture has 7,500 sq. ft. of GRFA. Therefore, in 1999 this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA (plus two "250 Additions") by 1,795 sq. ft. In 2004, the Town's GRFA regulations were again amended. Under these new regulations, this property is now allowed 7,286 sq. ft. of GRFA. The existing structure, including the appropriate portions of the garage level and the appropriate portions of the mechanical level, has 8,801 sq. ft. of GRFA. The existing structure exceeds today's allowable GRFA by 1,515 sq. ft. The applicant is currently proposing to add an additional 466 sq. ft. of bedroom, entry, and elevator GRFA, thus proposing to exceed the current GRFA limits by 1,981 sq. ft. (approximalely 27o/o). On June 20, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the applicants' proposal to construct a garage addition and widen the driveway for Units 18A (Stephenson) and 18B (Schofield); plus construct a new entry, elevator, and bedroom addition and a new exterior stair case for Unit 18A. This previous proposal required variances from the setback, site coverage, and GRFA standards of the Two-Family Residential District. The Commission was generally supportive of the setback variance request; however, the Commission was not favorable toward the requested GRFA and site coverage variances. The applicant has since amended this proposal by eliminating the proposed bedroom and extending the proposed elevator to all five stories. IV. ROLES OF REVIEW]NG BODIES ' Order of Review: Generally, variance applications will be revidwed by the Planning and Environmental Commission, and then any accompanying design review application will be reviewed by the Design Review Board. Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a variance application, in accordance with Chapter 12-1 7, Variances, Vail Town Code. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a variance application. However, the Design Review Board is responsible for the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of any accompanying design review application. Town Council: The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission andior Design Review Board. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials for completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Code. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial. V. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff believes that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS Article 12-6C: Two-Family Residential (R) District (in part) 12-6C-1: PURPOSEi The two-family residential district is intended to provide sites for /ow density single-family or two-family residential uses, together with such public facilities as may be appropriately located in the same district. The two-family residential district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with single- family and two-family occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of such slfes by establishing appropriate site development standards. 12-6C-6: SEIBACKS: ln the R district, the minimum front setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum srde setback shall be fifteen feet (15'), and the minimum rear setback shall be fifteen feet (15'). 1 2-6C-8: DENS/ry CONTROL: A. Dwelling Units: Not more than a total of two (2) dwelling units shall be permitted on each site with only one dwelling unit permitted on existing /ofs /ess than fourteen thousand (14,000) square feet. 8. Gross Residential Floor Area: 1. The following gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted on each sife: a. Not more than forty six (46) square feef of gross residential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of the first ten thousand (10,000) square feet of site arqa; plus b. Thirty eight (38) square feet of gross resrdential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area over ten thousand (10,000) square feet, not exceeding fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet of slte area; plus c. Thifteen (13) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area over fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, not exceeding thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of site area; plus d. Six (6) square feet of gross resrdential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area in excess of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. 1 2-6C-9: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total site area. Chapter 12-17:Yariances (in part) 12-17-1: Purpose: A. Reasons for Seeking Variance: ln orderto prevent orfo /essen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing strucfures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the slte or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cosf or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. VI. SITE ANALYSIS Address: 1448Yail Valley Drive Legal Description: Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Valley Filing 1 Zoning: Two-Family Residential Land Use Plan Designation: Low Density Residential Current Land Use: Two-Family Dwelling Lot Size: 21,045 sq. ft. (0.48 acres) Standard Allowed/Reouired Existino Proposed Setbacks (min): Front 20 ft. 20 ft: 17.5 tt.Sides 1 5 ft. 29 ft.l 21 ft. 22 ft.l 21 ft.Rear: 15 ft. 53 ft. no change Height (max.): 30 ft./33 ft. Density (max): 2 dwellings 2 dwellings no change GRFA (max): 7,286 sq. ft. 8,801 sq. ft. 9,126 sq. ft. (+gZS sq.ft.) Site coverage (max.): 4,209 sq. ft. 3,843 sq. ft. 4,338 sq. ft. (+495 sq.ft.) Parking (min.): 18A (West) 4 4 (2 enclosed)4 (2 enclosed) n4 18B (East) 3 2 (1 enclosed)4 (2 enclosed) l.,' VII. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING Land Use Zoninq North: Residential Two-Family Residential South: Mixed Use N/A (White River National Forest)East: Residential Two-Family Residential West: Residential Two-Family Residential VIII. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by Chapter 12-16, Vail Town Code. A. Consideration of Factors Reqardinq Variances: 1.The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. This proposed addition is associated with a remodel of an existing residence originally approved by the Design Review Board in 1976 with construction completed in 1978. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition that, due to the orientation of the structure to the property line and Vail Valley Drive, encroaches 2Tz feet into the required 20 foot front setback. In 1991 , the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed setback variance for this proposed garage addition will not be detrimental to the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. The proposed garage, entry, and elevator additions will cause the structure to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage for this property by 129 sq. ft. Additionally, this existing residence currently exceeds the allowable GRFA for this site by 1,515 sq. ft., which is 21o/o GRFA than is allowed for other residences in the same zone district. The applicant is proposing the addition of a new entry and elevator that will further increase the non-conformity of this property. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request; the structure will exceed the allowable GRFA by 1,840 sq. ft. This is 25% more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in this same zone district. Staff does not believe deviations from the GRFA regulations to this degree are in keeping with the bulk/mass and general character of the Two-Family zone district. Therefore, Staff does not believe the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request are in keeping with the bulUmass and general character of the neighboring properties. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition that, due to the orientation of the structure to the property line and Vail Valley Drive, encroaches 2%feet into the required 20 foot front setback. In 1991 , the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed setback variance is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the Town's development objectives. As the Planning and Environmental Commission has historically approved several similar setback variance requests, Staff does not believe approval of this request will constitute a grant of special privilege. 2. ? This existing residence currently exceeds the allowable GRFA for this site by 1,515 sq. ft.; which is 21% more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in the same zone district. The applicant is proposing the addition of a new entry, elevator, and bedrosm that will further increase the non-conformity of this property. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request; the structure will exceed the allowable GRFA by 1,840 sq. ft. This is 25% more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in this same zone district. Staff does not believe deviations from the GRFA regulations to this degree are in keeping with the bult</mass and general character of the Two-Family zone district. Therefore, Staff does not believe the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom are in keeping with the bulUmass and general character of the neighboring properties. Staff also believes approval of the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage .request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom would be a grant of special privilege. As this property already exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA, so does not believe a further increase is appropriate. The proposed garage, entry, and elevator additions will cause the structure to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage for this property by 129 sq. ft. Since the proposed garage addition can be constructed without a site coverage variance, Staff does not believe the proposed site coverage variance is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the Town's development objectives. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff does not believe this proposal will have a significant impact on the public health, safety or welfare, public facllities, utilities, or light and air in comparison to existing conditions of the site. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. On June 20, 2005, the Planning and Environmental Commission reviewed the applicants' proposal to construct a garage addition and widen the driveway for Units 18A (Stephenson) and 188 (Schofield); plus construct a new entry, elevator, and bedroom addition and a new exterior stair case for Unit 18A. This previous proposal required variances from the setback, site coverage, and GRFA standards of the Two-Family Residential District. The Commission was generally supportive of the setback variance request; however, the Commission was less favorable toward the requested GRFA and site coverage variances. The applicant has since amended this proposal by eliminating the proposed bedroom and extending the proposed elevator to all five stories. 4. tx. B. The Planninq and Environmental Commission shall make the followino findinos before qrantinq a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title,b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone.c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Setback Variance The Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicant's reguest for a variance from Sectlon 12-6C-6, Sefbackg pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto, subject to the following condition: 1. This approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the design review application assocrated with this variance request. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission fnds; 1. The granting of this variance will not consfltute a granting of special prtvilege rnconsrstent with the limitations on other properties c/asslfred in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance witl not be detimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. This variance is warranted for the following reasons.' a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other propefties in the same district. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. 9ite Coveraoe Variance The Community Development Department recommends denial of a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located al 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based uoon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission denr'es the applicant's request for a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, Iocated at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The granting of this variance will constitute a granting of special privilege rnconsisfent with the limitatioins on other properfies c/assifed in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public heatth, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to prcperties or improvements in the vicinig. 3. Ih,'s variance is warranted for the following reasons; a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship rnconsr'sfent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other propefties in the same district. c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Densitv Control Variance The Community Development Department recommends denial of a variance from Section 12-6G8, Density Control, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allowfora residential addition, located aI 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Envirohmental Commission denies the applicant's request for a variance from Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: l0 The Ptanning and Environmental Commis;sion finds: 1. The granting of this variance will cons0tute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties c/asslfled in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or mateially injuious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. Ihrs variance is warranted for the following reasons.' a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship rnconsisfenf with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other propefties in the same district c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same districL X. ATTACHMENTS A. Amended Architectural Plans ll ii \ .i 5 F 1\ I I N iJi\ l$ ? 1 i (\ ut ii l( I r9 \' rlS l\!it -[ l* \$ SI -r fi i I q I L Attachment A *. siepHENSoN / scoFlELD RESIDENcE ADDlrloN Sno$don snd Hopkins ' Archltecls. P C' F :-::,-=.-rro1:1''15"' LOT 18, BLoCK 3, VAIL VALLEV FIRST FILING -. =*s'-Di;f '- I LL, I I ot E'l-rrtv!\ t,'- s':e,,"o! i vatu, coLoRADo I I t^ ry t N ,N h-Ii$ 'ts itr I ld. 3 in\i\l* IL t$ dlS lrs tr !- - --------J {1 .---- .- -i I q ! lrr E r. tt '.. t!'iI :\t' i -:- ----t l* E rG*l! ,! t$ |"r l'r ill q= !L'i I I *:3-lS?: od? 07.10'S! nEvdEDPEc I suEMnrAL I STEPTTENSON / SCOFIELD RESIDENCE ADDITION I Snowdon and Hopklnr Adtftecrs' P C. ; ii:3ftSl,* lff:l$Si ' I D N LOT {8, BLOCK 3, VAIL VALLEY FIRST FILING VAIL, COLORADO I {s I ! F I t {I f; D gl STEPHENSON / SCOFIELD RESIDENCE ADDITION LOT I8, BLOCK 3, VAIL VALLEY FIRST F]LING VAIL, COLORADO Sno*dd|.nd HopkhB . Ardtt cl8, P.C. l ?O,ar!a rD.ttr,r I v.l. Cdcrdoallta Frl4tlta'| | I I l'th :(\tn t; ls r7 t..tc ,p l$lr It\ xe. I Jcbr|,l!.r 25m , orr |}'-1u05 ; REVISEDFEC . srjoumar i STEPHENSON / SCOFIELD RESIDENCE ADDITION LOT {8, BLOCK 3, VAIL VALLEY FIRST FILING vAtL, coLoRADo i Sn*o-.no xod,itt. Ad .d!, P.c. ; i r,oEdllra lto.at!.tlil lv.|,cot baltt FAr(atLt{ei D $ t- l+ir\| .-i I rN\ I.$ is Itr r.e t\\It E$ur tst tx i I I I I I I D ul STEPHENSON / SCOFIELD RESIDENCE ADDITION LOT 18, BLOCK 3, VAIL VALLEY FIRST FILING VAIL, COLORADO Snoudon and Hopkins ' Archit€ctt. P.C ; P.O tc.!r40 ,r.r..16.20r V.!, C.lsrrolra!| r,l)( a?6 tlol l=lc\ I'N iT I ls '1- rs IV lcr l+N- -tI d-l I I I .r1I fl$ t t-F l! YC 'I I . ' ta l",,ru' 2507 : i >;{; -@ i o :ii$:Eli'" I I STEPHENSON / SCOFIELD RESIDENCE ADDITION LOT 18, BLOCK 3, VAIL VALLEY FIRST FILING VAIL, COLORADO Snolvdon ond flopkih6 . Ardrilecl6, P.C. P O. as 31.0 cr0-.tr.2r0' v.rl. Crlor.do lttt Fri.lll.taor I -1* I *l .JIF t:lii tn tn tl t- I I I -q' I { st'$)l?*c 1r t\it I I Rti E$l\i n m -'l ; I I I I I I ia-lNl- i\ lrt ir l1\\ri< !-t! -fi i | , .rooru'oa 250? | ' > !"i-----*':r;,-r ,iifffifff' l! STEPHENSON / SCOFTELD RESIDENCE ADDITION LOT 18, BLOCK 3, VAIL VALLEY FIRST FILING VAIL, COLORADO Snor,{don Bnd Hoplins . Alchitqcts, P.C. , P.O.9on:|it/t0 0704t6 2?01 : vnr, cobrlc !r06i F^t,l?l-t.l9l I Attachment D PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING July 25, 2005 (Excerpt) 4. A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail ValleyDrive/Lot18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects Planner: Bill Gibson ACTION: Motion to approve variance for setbacks MOTION: Viele SEGOND: Bernhardt VOTE:5-0-0 ACTION: Motion to approve variance for site coverage MOTION: Bernhardt SECOND: Viele VOTE: 4-1-0 (Jewitt opposed) ACTION: Motion to approve variance for GRFA MOTION: Viele SECOND: Bernhardt VOTE: 4-1-0 (Jewitt opposed) Additional finding that this variance approval is for an elevator and an elevator entry. Bill Gibson presented an overview of the proposal and the staff memorandum. Pam Hopkins and John Schofield presented the variance requests and their reasoning for the requests. Commissioner Jewitt was supportive of the setback variance, but not the site coverage or GRFA variances. Commissioner Viele agreed with the applicant that more changes are needed to GRFA regulations, but noted that John Schofield was directly involved in the most recent changes in the GRFA regulationS, He noted his personal belief that anything below grade should not count as GRFA, Commissioner Bernhardt agreed that the regulations adopted by the Town Council gave basement deductions to only the lowest level of a house. However, he believes the applicant's proposal meets the intent of the law and is being evaluated in a site specific situation. Commissioner Cahill noted his concern about precedgnt and his support for variances for the garage. Attachment E THIS ITEM MAY EFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE lS HEREBY GIVEN that the Town Council of the Town of Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-3, Vail Town Code, on Tuesday, September 6, 2005, at 6:00 PM in the Town of Vail Municipal Building, in consideration ot ITEM/TOPIC: An appeal, pursuantto Section 12-3-3,Appeals, Vail Town Code, of the Town of Vail Planning and Environmental Commission's approval of a variance from Section 1 2-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12- 6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17 ,Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 1 8, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereb. Appellant Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofeld, represented by Snowdon and Hopkins Architects Planner: Bill Gibson The applications and information about the proposals are avaihble for public inspection during regular office hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site tsits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information. Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call (970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing lmpaired, br information, TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Ptanning and Environm"ffi Community Development Department June 27,2005 A request for a final review of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located al 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1 , and setting forth details in regard thereto. (PEC05-0047) Applicant Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects Planner: Bill Gibson il. SUMMARY The applicants, Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects, are requesting a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, and Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1. Based upon Staff's review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented, the Community Development Department recommends approval, with conditions, of the setback variance request; approval, with conditions, of the site coverage variance request; and denial of the GRFA variance request subject to the findings noted in Section lX of this memorandum. DescnrproH or neeuesr The applicants, Robert Stephenson, Jr. and John Schofield, represented by Snowdon & Hopkins Architects, are proposing to construct a garage addition to Units 18A (Stephenson) and 188 (Schofield); plus a new entry, elevator, and bedroom addition to Unit 18A. The new garage addition will widen the existing three car garage to the west to create a four car garage (two spaces per dwelling unit). Above this garage addition the applicant is proposing to construct a new 272 sq. ft. bedroom and bathroom. To the west of the proposed garage addition the applicant is proposing to construct a new 110 sq. ft. single-story front entry room with a 42 sq. ft. three-story elevator addition. The applicant is also proposing to widen the existing driveway and construct a new exterior stair from the driveway to the third-floor entry to Unit 18A. The proposed garage addition to Units 18A and 188 encroaches into the front setback and exceeds the allowable site coverage for this property. The proposed entry and elevator on Unit 18A exceed both site coverage and GRFA, and the bedroom addition also exceeds the allowable GRFA. 1il. A vicinity map (Attachment A), site photographs (Attachment B), a more detailed description of the applicant's request (Attachments C), and the proposed architectural plans (Attachment D) have been attached for reference. BACKGROUND This two-family residence was originally approved by the Design Review Board in 1976 and construction was completed in 1978. The original approved architectural plans blend the overlapping garage level (finished floor elevation 8267') and the mechanical levef (finished floor elevation 8277') into one "basement plan" even though these levels are separated by a floor-to-floor measurement of 10 feet. According to the Town of Vail's records, this structure was originally allowed 5,261 sq. ft. of GRFA. However, 5,491 sq. ft. of GRFA was constructed and a final certificate of occupancy was issued. Therefore, in 1978 this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA by 230 sq. ft. lt is unclear how the GRFA was calculated for this structure at that time. At some point in time a party wall was constructed to separate the garage level parking spaces, and a portion of the garage level located directly below the storage room on the mechanical level was converted from a parking space into a storage room (i.e. GRFA). On June 24, 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Even though the Town's GRFA regulations had been amended several times since 1978, GRFA calculations were not done at the time of this variance approval. In 1999, allowed and existing GRFA calculations were conducted. According to Town of Vail records, the allowable GRFA in 1999 for this lot was 5,205 sq. ft., plus each unit was eligible for one "250 Addition" for a total of 5,705 sq. ft. However, the existing GRFA calculations (including a "250 Addition" for the Schofield residence) were 6,393 sq. ft. Therefore in 1999, this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA calculations by 1,'188 sq. ft. and 688 so. ft. when two "250 Additions" were included in the- calculations. lt is unclear how the GRFA was calculated in 1999, but it appears that no portion of the garage level or mechanical level (shown on a single "basement plan" drawing) was counted as GRFA; even though the entire mechanical level qualified as GRFA and the unapproved garage level storage room also qualified as GRFA. Recalculating the garage and mechanical levels using 1999 GRFA methods, the structure has 7,500 sq. ft. of GRFA. Therefore, in 1999 this structure exceeded the allowable GRFA (plus two '250 Additions") by 1,795 sq. ft. In 2004, the Town's GRFA regulations were again amended. Under these new regulations, this property is now allowed 7,286 sq. ft. of GRFA. The existing structure, including the appropriate portions of the garage level and the appropriate portions of the mechanical level, has 8,801 sq. ft. of GRFA. The existing structure exceeds today's allowable GRFA by 1,5,|5 sq. ft, The applicant is currently proposing to add an additional 466 sq. ft. of bedroom, entry, and elevator GRFA, thus proposing to exceed the current GRFA limits by 1,981 sq. ft. (approximately 27%). This proposal is scheduled for review by the Design Review Board at its July 6, 2005, public hearing. tv.ROLES OF REVIEWING BODIES Order of Review: Generally, variance applications will be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission, and then any accompanying design review application will be reviewed by the Design Review Board. Planning and Environmental Gommission: The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of a variance application, in accordance with Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code. Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority over a variance application. However, the Design Review Board is responsible for the final approval, approval with modifications, or denial of any accompanying design review application. Town Council: The Town Council has the authority to hear and decide appeals from any decision, determination, or interpretation by the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. The Town Council may also call up a.decision of the Planning and Environmental Commission and/or Design Review Board. Staff: The Town Staff facilitates the application review process. Staff reviews the submitted application materials for completeness and general compliance with the appropriate requirements of the Town Gode. Staff also provides the Planning and Environmental Commission a memorandum containing a description and background of the application; an evaluation of the application in regard to the criteria and findings outlined by the Town Code; and a recommendation of approval, approval with modifications, or denial. APPLICABLE PLANNING DOCUMENTS Staff believes that the following provisions of the Vail Town Code are relevant to the review of this proposal: TITLE 12: ZONING REGULATIONS Article 12-6C: Two-Family Residential (R) District (in part) 12-6C-1: PURPOSE: The two-family residential district is intended to provide sites for low density single-family or two-family residential uses, fogether with such public facilities as may be appropriately located in the same district. The two-family residential district is intended to ensure adequate light, air, privacy and open space for each dwelling, commensurate with single- family and two-family occupancy, and to maintain the desirable residential qualities of such sifes by establishing appropriate site development standards. V. 12-6C-6: SEIBACKS; ln the R district, the minimum ftont setback shall be twenty feet (20'), the minimum side setback shall be fifteen feet (15'), and the minimum rear setback shall be fifteen feet (15'). 1 2-6C-8: DENSITY CONIROL; A. Dwelling Units: Not more than a total of two (2) dwelling units shall be permifted on each site with only one dwelling unit permitted on existing /ots /ess than fourteen thousand (14,000) square feet. B. Gross Residential Floor Area: 1. The following gross residential floor area (GRFA) shall be permitted on each site: a. Not more than forty six (46) square feet of gross residential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of the first ten thousand (10,000) square feet of site area; plus b. Thitly eight (38) square feet of gross resrdential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area over ten thousand (10,000) square feet, not exceeding fifteen thousand (1 5,000) square feet of site area; plus c. Thirteen (13) square feef of gross residential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area over fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, not exceeding thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of site area; plus d. Six (6) square feet of gross resrdential floor area (GRFA) for each one hundred (100) square feet of site area in excess of thirty thousand (30,000) square feet. 1 2-6C-9: SITE COVERAGE: Site coverage shall not exceed twenty percent (20%) of the total site area. Chapter 12-17:Variances (in part) 12-17-1 : Purpose: 4. Reasons for Seeking Variance: ln orderto prevent orfo /essen such practica! difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of this title as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape, or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. VI. SITE ANALYSIS Address: Legal Description: Zoning: Land Use Plan Designation: Current Land Use: Lot Size: 1448Yail Valley Drive Lot 18, Block 3, VailValley Filing 1 Two-Family Residential Low Density Residential Two-Family Dwelling 21,045 sq. ft. (0.48 acres) Standard Setbacks (min): Front: Sides Rear: Height (max.): Density (max): GRFA (max): Allowed/Reouired Site coverage (max.): Landscape Area (min,): Parking (min.): 18A (West) 188 (East) vil.SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING 30 ft./33 ft. 2 dwellings 2 dwellings no change 7,286 sq. ft. 8,801 sq. ft. 9,270 sq. ft. (++eS sq.ft.) 4,209 sq. ft. 3,843 sq. ft. 4,488 sq. ft. (+S+S sq.ft.) 12,627 sq. ft.j 4 4 (2 enclosed) 4 (2 enclosed)3 2 (1 enclosed)4 (2 enclosed) Existinq Proposed 20 ft. 17 ft.. 29ft.|21ft. 22ft.t 21ft. 53 ft. no change Zoninq Two-Family Residential N/A (White River National Forest) Two-Family Residential Two-Family Residential 20ft. 15 ft. 15 ft. fl1 North: South: East: West: Land Use Residential Mixed Use Residential Residential VIII. CRITERIAANDFINDINGS The review criteria for a request of this nature are established by Chapter 12-16,Yail Town Code. A. Consideration of Factors Reqardinq Variances: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. This proposed addition is associated with a remodel of an existing residence originally approved by the Design Review Board in 1976 with construction completed in 1978. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition that, due to the orientation of the structure to the property line and Vail Valley Drive, encroaches three feet into the required 20 foot front setback. In 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet.into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed 2. setback variance for this proposed garage addition will not be detrimental to the existing or potentlal uses and structures in the vicinity. This proposed garage addltion will cause the structure to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage for this property. However, the proposed garage addition will increase the existing three car garage to a four car garage (two spaces for each dwelling unit) which is one the Town's development objectives encouraged by the Town's zoning regulations. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed site coverage variance necessary for this garage addition will not be detrimental to the existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. This existing residence currently exceeds the allowable GRFA for this site by 1,506 sq. ft., which is 21o/o GRFA than is allowed for other residences in the same zone district. The applicant is proposing the addition of a new entry, elevator, and bedroom that will further increase the non- conformity of this property. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request; the structure will exceed the allowable GRFA by 1,972 sq. ft. This is 27o/o more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in this same zone district. Staff does not believe deviations from the GRFA regulations to this degree are in keeping with the bulk/mass and general character of the Two-Family zone district. Therefore, Staff does not believe the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom are in keeping with the bulk/mass and general character of the neighboring properties. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege. The applicant is proposing to construct a garage addition that, due to the orientation of the structure to the property line and Vail Valley Drive, encroaches three feet into the required 20 foot front setback. In 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a front setback variance to allow for the construction of an additional garage bay to the east of the existing garages. This proposed garage encroached 12.5 feet into the 20 foot setback; however, this addition was never constructed. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed setback variance is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the Town's development objectives. As the Planning and Environmental Commission has historically approved several similar setback variance requests, Staff does not believe approval of this request will constitute a grant of special privilege. This proposed garage addition will cause the structure to exceed the maximum allowable site coverage for this property. However, the proposed garage addition will increase the existing three car garage to a four car garage (two spaces for each dwelling unit) which is one the B. Town's development objectives encouraged by the Town's zoning regulations. Therefore, Staff believes the proposed site coverage variance necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the Town's development objectives. As the Planning and Environmental Commission has historically approved several similar setback variance requests, Staff does not believe approval of this request will constitute a grant of special privilege. This existing residence currently exceeds the allowable GRFA for this site by 1,515 sq. ft.; which is 21o/o more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in the same zone district. The applicant is proposing the addition of a new entry, elevator, and bedroom that will further increase the non-conformity of this property. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request; the structure will exceed the allowable GRFA by 1,981 sq. ft. This is 27o/o more GRFA than is allowed for other residences in this same zone district. Staff does not believe deviations from the GRFA regulations to this degree are in keeping with the bulk/mass and general character of the Two-Family zone district. Therefore, Staff does not believe the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom are in keeping with the bulk/mass and general character of the neighboring properties. Staff also believes approval of the proposed GRFA variance request and site coverage request associated with the proposed entry, elevator, and bedroom would be a grant of special privilege. As this property already exceeds the maximum allowable GRFA, so does not believe a further increase is appropriate. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. Staff does not believe this proposal will have a significant impact on the public health, safety or welfare, public facilities, utilities, or light and air in comparison to existing conditions of the site. 4. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. The design review application associated with this proposal is tentatively scheduled for review by the Town of Vail Design Review Board at its July 6, 2005, public hearing. The Plannino and Environmental Commission shall make the followinq findinqs before qrantinq a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. tx. 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone.c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Setback Variance The Community Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of a variance from Section 12-6C-6, Setbacks, pursuant to Chapter 12-17,Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allowfora residential addition, located at1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block '3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Ptanning and Environmental Commission approves the appticant's reguest for a variance from Secfion 12-6C-6, Sefbackg pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, Iocated at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto, subject to the following condition: 1. This approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the design review application assocrated with this variance requesL Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commisslon finds: 1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special pivilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. Ih,'s variance is warranted for the following reasons.' . a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district" c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other propefties in the same district. Site Coveraqe Variance The Gommunity Development Department recommends approval, with a condition, of a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located al 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based upon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission approves the applicanf's request for a variance from Section 12-6C-9, Site Coverage, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and sefting forth details in regard thereto, subject to the following condition: 1 . This approval shall only be for the approximately 124 sq. ft. of additional site coverage necessa4i/ for the construction of the proposed garage addition. The additional site coverage granted by this vaiance shall not be used to accommodate the construction of any other addition to this structure. 2. This approval shall be contingent upon the applicant receiving Town of Vail approval of the design review applicafion associafed with this vaiance request. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The granting of this variance will not constitute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties c/assrfied in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to propefties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. This variance is warranted for the following reasons.' a. The stict titeral interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same districL c. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of pivileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Densitv Control Variance The Community Development Department recommends denial of a variance from Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, pursuant to Chapter 12-17, Yariances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential addition, located at1448 Vail Valley Drive/Lot 18, Block 3, Vail Village Filing 1, and setting forth details in regard thereto. This recommendation is based uoon the review of the criteria in Section Vlll of this memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission pass the following motion: The Planning and Environmental Commission denies the applicant's request for a variance from Section 12-6C-8, Density Control, pursuant to Chapter 12- 17, Variances, Vail Town Code, to allow for a residential garage addition, located at 1448 Vait Valley Drive/Lot'18, Block 3, Vait Village Filing 1, and setting fotth details in regard thereto. Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to deny this variance request, the Community Development Department recommends the Commission makes the following findings: l0 The Planning and Environmental Commission finds: 1. The granting of this variance will constifute a granting of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properfies c/asslfed in the Two-Family Residential District. 2. The granting of this variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or weffare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinitY. 3. This variance is warranted for the fotlowing reasons.' a. The strict titeral interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsr'sfenf with the objectives of Title 12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code. b. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to other propefties in the same district. c. The strict interpretation or enforcetment of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district X. ATTACHMENTS A. Vicinity Map B. Applicant's Request C. Site Photographs D. Architectural Plans E. Public Hearing Notice ll Attachment: B