Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5025 Main Gore Pl ApprovalsMINUTES PLANNING & ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MEETING OF April 10, 1979 COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Ed Drager Jack Goehl Ron Todd Gerry White Sandy Mills Roger Tilkemeier Jim Morgan STAFF MEMBER: Jim Rubin The first item on the agenda: Ast /Kleimer Duplex Request for Variance, Lot 14, Vail Meadows_lst Filing, was withdrawn by the applicant. The second item on the agenda: Fitzhugh Scott - Resub- division of Lots 10 & 11, Block 1, Vail Village lst Filing to correct a lot line. • Jim Rubin presented this to the Commission, and after some discussion, the Motion was made by Ron Todd to approve the resubdivision of Lots 10 & 11, Block 1, Vail Village lst Filing to correct the location of a lot line. Roger Tilkemeier seconded the Motion and the Commission voted unanimous approval. The third item on the agenda: Prelminary review of the First Phase of a Townhouse Project on 5.6 acre unplatted parcel in Bighorn. Mr. Steven Hannon, President of Landmark Properties was present to address the Commission along with Ron McCaughan and their architect. Jim Rubin explained the First Phase is for 5 duplex parcels as part of a 30 unit Townhouse project which will be called Sundial. Mr. Rubin explained that the parcels will be sold separately as duplex home sites. Jim explained that he had discussed this concept with Larry Rider, Town Attorney and that the staff feels this is an advantage+Aus way of handling the project as it will allow flexibility on the location of buildings. Townhouse declarations for this project were then discussed. These declarations provide legal access to the 5 parcels, as well as size restrictions. Jim Rubin requested that more specific restrictions in regard to Setbacks, Height, Site Coverage, Landscaping and Parking be included in these declarations. The site plan was presented to the Commission. After 18 further discussion, the Motion was made by Gerry White to approve the first phase of the Sundial. Townhouse project with the condition..:that the development restrictions of the Two- Family Residential Zone District in regard to Setbacks, Height, Site Coverage, Landscaping, and Parking. Page 2. MINUTES -PEC 4 -10 -79 be included in the Townhouse declarations for this First Phase. Ron Todd seconded the Motion and the Commission voted unanimous approval. The fourth item on the agenda: Re- Application for a Conditional Use Permit for the Schober Building in Commercial Core I. Craig Snowdon made his presentation to the Commission. This second proposal cuts out alot of the square footage that was presented with the first proposal. They now propose to add 1,859 sq. ft., which is 1,100 sq. ft. less than the first proposal. He again told the Commission that they will be adding to all five levels of the building but will be reducing the northern extension considerably. He also discussed the Public /Private Joint Venture application with the Commission. This application is for benches and planters along Gore Creek Dr.., and the Fountain Plaza with additional plantings on Town property by the Creekside stairs. The 4th level has been changed from what was proposed at the preliminary discussion. The owner now proposes to put in kitchenettes and loft bedrooms in the Accommodation.units and use these two units for employee housing. The shop owner and.the owner of the restaurant have already expressed interest in leasing these units for their employees. Ron Todd asked whether the owner will commit these units under the same criteria as other employee housing units which will remain as long -term rentals for a 20 -year period? It was the Commission members feeling that these units should meet this criteria. The owner discussed this with the Commission and stated he had no problems with this commitment as long as he can come back and change the use of the units if the situation requires it. The owner was told that Larry Rider, Town Attorney, will draft the conditions for the employee housing, as a deed restriction, or something in this order. Ed Drager stated that Pepi Gramshammer had sent a letter to the Commission in opposition to the additions to buildings in the Core. Mr. Gramshammer was present and spoke to his concerns for building out in the Village. Mr. Drager explained to Mr. Gramshammer that the Planning & Environmental Commission in dealing with the Conditional Use Permit process, needs to review all the criteria set down in the Town of Vail Zoning Ordinance and that each project must stand on its own. He stated that the Schober Building had been turned down the first time it was presented. He assured Mr. Gramshammer.that not all expansions will be approved and each would have to be reviewed on its own merit. Any of the proposals that will be brought to the Planning Commission will have to show beneficial effects throughout, and the Commission will adhere to strict standards for any additional construction in the Village. However, he added, there has to be changes from time to time. Roger Tilkemeier stated that the Commission had been told by Larry Rider, that the Conditional Use Permits do not set precedent, and so they are not bound to approve all proposals for additions to the buildings in the Core. M E M 0 • TO: PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION FROM: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: APRIL 6, 1979 RE: STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION MEETING ON APRIL 10, 1979 1.) Ast /Kleimer Duplex- Application has been withdrawn. 2.) Fitzhugh Scott Resubdivision This resubdivision is to legally record a change in the lot line between Lots 10 and 11 that happened about five years ago. This change in the lot line makes Lot 11 more conforming than it presently is. Staff Recommendation: Approval 3.) McCaughan Townhouse Project This is the First Phase of the proposed 33 unit Sundial Project on a 5.6 unplatted parcel in Bighorn. The First Phase is the creation of four building envelopes similar to the Casolar- del -Norte Subdivision. The building envelopes are for duplex sites, and are different from the Casolar Subdivision in that they include both land for the buildings and areas around the buildings. We feel that this is a better concept than the smaller, more defined building envelopes in that there is more flexibility for the placement of buildings. It is, however, a Townhouse concept, with these four sites a part of the overall townhouse development. This has been discussed with the Town .Attorney, who has .no difficulty with the concept. Staff Recommendation: Approval 4.) Schober Building - Conditional Use Permit This is a resubmittal of a Conditional Use Request that was denied by the PEC on March 13, 1979. This application has been revised considerably, with the square footage addition of usable space reduced from 2,906 square feet to 1,859 square feet. The major change, as shown to your on March 27, 1979, was a r 1 ICJ MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Department of Community Development /Peter Patten DATE: September 22, 1981 RE: Minor subdivision request to abandon the common lot line between parcels 4 and 5, Sundial Phase 1. Applicant: Benchmark Homes of Colorado REQUEST The applicant requests the abandonment of the lot line separating lots 4 and 5 of the Sundial Project, Phase I. There were 5 duplex lots, each of 15,000 . square feet of site area approved along with the recently completed townhouse project. None of these lots have been developed, and we are now getting requests for development approval on these lots. They are all zoned Residential (R) and are all allowed 3750 square feet of GRFA. The applicant wishes to unify the development of these two lots by building 2 duplexes separated from each other by a "common" garage facility. The objective is to unify development of the two lots by similar designs and to best utilize the areas of the two lots. The density and GRFA is not affected by this proposals RECOMMENDATION The Department of Community Development recommends approval of this minor subdivision request. Developing the four units at one time will mitigate construction impacts on the site (between one duplex and the adjacent site). The lot line abandonment allows more of a clustered -type feeling to the two duplexes,, more closely approaching all the surrounding properties (Vail East Townhomes and Sundial Townhomes). Moreover, this proposal may allow the western- most units to be pulled away from the Vail East Townhome project which is in close proximity. lie Planning and Environmental Commission September 28, 1981 MEMBERS PRESENT STAFF Gerry White Peter Patten Scott Edwards Peter Jamar Will Trout Betsy Rosol.ack Dan Corcoran Larry Eskwith Jim Morgan Dick Ryan later; Roger Tilkemeier COUNCIL REP Ron Todd Gerry White, chairman, called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. He asked for approval of the minutes of the meeting of September 14. Dan moved and Jim seconded to approve the minutes. The vote was 4 -0 in favor with Scott abstaining. 1. Request to vacate a lot line between parcels 4 and 5, Sundial Phase I, part of an unplatted parcel in Bighorn Subdivision Applicant: Benchmark Homes of Colorado. Peter Patten explained that this lot was very flat with no vegetation to be concerned about, that it was surrounded by multifamily units. Without the vacation, the owner could built two separate duplexes. The concensus of feeling was that the owner was attempting to fit-the appearance of the structures with the multi-family units farther east. Dan moved and Will seconded to approve the vacation of the lot line between parcels 4 and 5, Sundial Phase I per the staff memo dated September 28, 1981. The vote was 5 -0 in favor of approval. 2. Request for a side and rear setback variance for lot 2, Cliffside Subdivision, part of Lions' Ridge Filing No. 2. Applicant: David L. Cole. Peter Jamar explained the memo_ Craig Snowdon, architect for the applicant, showed 3 site plans and described the process that had transpired with Eagle County. He stated that after submitting the original site plan, the County sent him a letter asking for modifications. These were made, and the drawings reissued, In the meantime, the surveyor had staked out the building according to the old drawings. The owner selected a new contractor and construction was begun, but the building staking laid out by the surveyor was never rechecked or changed, leaving the existing situation. He said that this was an unintentional error on the part of the applicant. The .applicant has received letters from the owners of the neighboring lots with favorable responses in every case. Craig showed photos showing the areas where the setback variances were requested. He added that if the building were to be moved forward, it would be more promi- nent. He stated that the hardship was the fact that the building was in place. ■