Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-0425 PECPLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION April 25, 1994 Prolect Orientation/Lunch 11:00 a. m. Site Visits 11:30 p.m. 1. Frederick - 2840 Basingdale 2. Plavec - 1799 Sierra Trail 3. Garton - 143 East Meadow Drive Public Hearina 12:30 pm. Applicant: Dan Frederic Planner: Andy Knudts 1 6 - 4. A request for a worksession for a variance to allow for GRFA and a garage to be located in the front setback, a site coverage variance and a wall height variance to allow for a new Primary/Secondary residence located at 1799 Sierra Trail/Lot 17, Vail Village West 1st Filing. Applicant: John Ulbrich, represented by Gateway Developmentl P12-nner: Jim Curnutte TABLED INDEFINITELZ 0 4 Kristan Pritz Mike Mollica Andy Knudtsen 2. A request for a worksession for a conditional use permit to allow for an outdoor dining deck located at Garton's Saloon located at 143 East Meadow Drive/a part of Lot P, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1 st Filing. Applicant: Dave Garton Planner: Randy Stoudl Randy Stouder made a presentation per the staff memo and requested that the PEC focus • Section IV, Discussion Issues, • the staff memo. Dave Garton stated that he would like to see the ranchyard operation stay open until 10:00 p.m. each night as the restaurant remains open until 10:00 p.m. and patrons like to eat outside during the summer months. Rick Richards, the Manager of Garton's Saloon, stated that patrons seem to prefer to have dinner outside in the summer months and tend to dine later in the evening than during the winter season. He stated that they wanted the ranchyard primarily for giving patrons a pleasant dining experience. Dave Garton presented the PEC with a diagram showing the ranchyard setup from last year and explained that they were proposing two speakers this year as opposed to the four speakers they had last summer. Dave stated that they would be utilizing taped music. He stated that there would probably not be live entertainment and that they planned to have mainly taped music with a disc jockey. 1JJ[ff,;-3JMJM=4 r In • I' ♦ Im � • r 1; Rick Richards stated that they would play a wide variety of music including jazz, country, and rock and that they had contracted with a cable company that has thirty different channels of music. Planning and Environmental Commission April 29, 1994 Dan Telleen, owner of Karat's, stated that he preferred to leave his door of his shop open during the summer and that he was concerned that this would make his store excessively noisy. Audrey McLean, an adjacent property owner, stated that the noise from Garton's was very disruptive last summer and that the value of her property has decreased because • these problems. Kathy Langenwalter asked Jeff Layman to explain how the Town of Vail handleiv complaints such as those about Garton's. Jeff Layman of the Vail Police Department stated that there was an increase in complaints along Meadow Drive in the Garton's vicinity last summer about boisterous behavior. He said he needed to review the information more thoroughly in or er to answer Kathy's question • enforcement procedures. Rick Richards explained he had contacted the Town Attorney to obtain information or complaints received by the Police Department. He stated that eleven incidents had been reported, beginning late August of 1993. an Telleen asked whether Rick's report showed what time of day the complaints occurred. Rick Richards went through his list and stated the times for the several incidents whic occurred around 2:00 p.m., the closing time at Garton's. Dan Telleen stated that the existing noise ordinance does not control noise adequately. He added that he had similar problems with Sheika's deck when his shop was located on Wall Street. He suggested that the decibel level be reduced in the ordinance during late hours, i.e. 9:00 to 10:00 p.m. The battle of the bands is not appropriate. Ann Louthan, representing the Village Center Condominium Association, stated that she tended to agree with Audrey's comments and that amplified music seemed to be major concern for her condominium owners. Greg Amsden stated that he rented in Village Center last fall and that the Village in general was noisy. *ave Garton stated that they never intended to have amplified sound after 10:00 Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 1994 4 Ah Packy Walker, owner of the Lifthouse Lodge, stated that it may be necessary to modify Mr the noise limit on amplified sound. He had installed double glazed windows to help cut down on the noise at his condominiums. He also said a balance needed to be struck between street activity on decks and residential owners wanting peace and quiet in the core areas. Greg Amsden stated that he approved of the new speaker placements. He felt that the crowd noise on Friday afternoons would always exceed • decibels. He felt that 9:30 p.m. was an appropriate time to close down the ranchyard if you wanted people off of the deck by 1 0:00 p.m. The decibel limit will be addressed by the Council in the sount' ordinance. Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 9994 9 Dave Garton stated that he would like to submit a petition with four hundred signatures into the record for the PEC to review. He read the names of the businesses to the PEC who had signed the petition in favor of the Garton's outdoor dining deck. Kathy Langenwalter stated that she was in agreement with the other board members' comments. She said that Dalton's suggestion about consulting a sound engineer was a good one. She felt that the Garton's ranchyard area was in need of a lot of clean up and repair and that she was concerned with the condition of the wheelchair lift and suggested that it should be made more attractive. Dave Garton stated that they did not own the wheelchair lift and that any concern about it should be brought to Steve Stafford's attention. Kathy Langenwalter asked Randy to research the history ♦ the wheelchair lift. Kathy Langenwalter stated that she would like to see the landscaping planted before the conditional use permit allowing the deck this summer goes into effect. Jeff Bowen felt that Dave Garton should get together with Dan Telleen before openinit in order to ensure that there will not be the same noise issues that there were last summer. Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 1994 9 3. A request fora worksession for a wall height variance to allow for a single family residence to be constructed at 2840 Basingdale/Lot 4, Block 9, Intermountain Subdivision. Applicant: Dan Frederick Planner: Andy Knudtsen E Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 1994 9 4. A request for a worksession for a variance to allow for GRFA and a garage to be R in the front setback, a site coverage variance and a wall height variance to allow for a new Primary/Secondary residence located at 1799 Sierra Trail/Lot 17, Vail Village West 1 st Filing. Applicant: George Plavec P1,2-nner: Mike Mollica It should be noted that Kristan Pritz stepped out • the room for this item. Erich Hill, the architect for this proposal, stated that he had met with Greg Hall, Town Engineer, and explained to the PEC what they discussed at that meeting. Mike Mollica stated he spoke with Greg Hall this morning and that Greg would like to see the turning radius into the surface parking area enlarged. Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 1994 Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 5994 N Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 1994 N :7 TO: Planning and Environmental Commissior, FROM: Community Development Department IATE: April 25, 199 QUBJECT: A request for a worksession to discuss the application for a conditional use - permit to allow for an outdoor restaurant, bar, and dining deck operation at the Garton's Saloon, Crossroads Center, located at 143 East Meadow Drive/Lot 1, Block 5D, Vail Village First Filing. Applicant: Garton's Saloon/Dave Garton Planner: Randy Stouder v F_ Conditional Use The proposed operation is allowed as a conditional use per the aforementioned sectiOrfs' 18.28.040(l) and 18.28.030(E) of the Municipal Zoning Code. IV. A. Land Use Plan The Land Use Plan/Goals and Policies specify the following: "35 Entertainment oriented businesses and cultural activities should be encouraged in the core areas to create diversity. More night time business, on-going events and sanctioned "street happenings" should be encouraged." The Vail Village Master Plan does encourage the development • a variety of new commercial activity where compatible with existing land uses, and specifies the following policy to achieve this objective: 11 3.3.2 E2 Lim Outdoor dining is an important streetscape feature and shall be encouraged in commercial infill or redevelopment projects." As this is a worksession, staff has not analyzed the conditional use permit criteria. We hav6 listed them below for the Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC) information. 00 Before acting on a conditional use application, the Planning and Environmental commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposed use: 1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town. E 9 2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public needs. M Issue #1: Will the hours of operation 4:00 to 9:00 p.m. adequately control the crowd and will the patrons actually move off of the parking deck at 9:00 p.m.? The deck should be cleared completely of patrons by 9:00 P.M; music must be off by 9:00 P.M. or i ce_ with 15 minutes to move guests inside or off of the premises. The applicant proposes to increase the number of tables. This request should be looked at closely. E I. Issue #2: The applicant proposes amplified pipe music out to the ranchyard area. Piped music must meet the noise ordinance which specifies a maximum number of decibels permitted at 65 decibels (d/b) between it a.m. and 11:00 p.m. (See Ordinance No. 1, Series • 1•91). The changes to the speaker locations and numbers are positive. Is live music acceptable on the outside deck and should that be allowed as part of the conditional use permit criteria? Live music is acceptable to staff as long as the sound ordinance is met. Issue #4- Does the PC still feel that the parking situation of last year worked effectively and should we continue with the same situation of providing the valet parking spaces and allowing the ranchyard setup to remain in place during the day? WMIM Staff would like to hear the business and condominium owners' comments concerning this issue. Should the term of the conditional use permit be restricted to the propose* seasonal operation of one year at a time? 70MRMMi r-01 r «r If . 1 9 1 1 AM 010 The loading activity from last year has created an eyesore along the Frontage Road. The applicant accessed the parking deck directly off of the Frontage Road and used this area to unload band equipment, food, liquor and other k, items. Staff feels that last year's loading situation is inappropriate and most likely used US 6 right-of-way. The loading activity also blocked access to a fire hydrant occasionally. , I a- Staff feels that a new solution needs to be arrived at for the loading issue an* that Garton's should propose a different loading area. We also would like to see this area revegetated. 7*hould the exterior appearance of the ranchyard be improvecZr LIM Staff believes that the lighting, landscaping, retaining wall and siding along ti entry deck need to be upgraded. We are also concerned about the storage which occurs on the parking and entry decks. Staff believes that certain activities such as the horseshoe pits may have been operated off-site on Town or State property in the right -of -way. Staff Response: Staff feels that all activities associated with the ranchyard should be contained on the applicant's property, Banners and flyers became a problem at times last year. The applicant put U�_ the banners and flyers advertising activities at the ranchyard. — , a- 00 . Staff has determined that banners and flyers are illegal under the Sign Code and will not be allowed to be displayed around Town or at the ranchyard or exterior of the Saloon. c:\pec\memos\gartons.42 n . P.O. Box 1057 --c 143 E. Meadow Drive w Vail, Colorado 81658 w (303) 479-0607 w FAX (303) 476 -7455 �s I T 1 t VA tj Aj Pt 4 A m m 0 7 -- P � GAP, IT 13"a Aj e f� T V Slifer Management Company --- Property Management & Leasing --- March 23, 1.994 411 Dave Garton DQTR, Inc. Garton's Saloon 143 E. Meadow Drive 0100 Vail, CO 81.657 Re: Space 2100, Crossroads East As a condition of this approval, you are required to extensively and temporarily decaraLe the entire space in an appropriate manner a nd - 1 -1 to define J area wUh jn)pes, wooden stanchions, wooden horses, split rail fences and/or any other appropriate materials approved in adva"We by my office. You must also relandscape the d amage d l areas adjacent to this parking lot this spring and this fall, where dammled by Canton's use. You may use the space for major outdoor coot--outs and barbeques for large groups. The outdoor barbeques may start as early as 4:00 p.m. and they may last as late as 9:00 p.m. You may serve beer, wine and drinks in this area as long as it is approved by the Town of Vail. You will be required to provide proof of adequate insurance coverage for the parking lot and adjacent common areas in addition to your insurance coverage for Space 11100, Crossroads East. If you have any questions, don't hesitate to contact me. PU Tom Nomlow Drive, Site M Vail, Cult m& 81057 lhlrplumw: (W) 476-1063 Telfax: (303) 476-2523 FROM: Holly McCutcheon, Town Clerk F E: Garton's Saloon Request for Conditional Use Permit - Outdoor Dining Deck This memo is provided as an informational update regarding last summer's usage of an outdoor dining deck or ranchyard that was permitted at Garton's Saloon. On July 26, 1993, Dave Garton appeared before the PEC, requesting Garton's outdoor deck or ranchyard be allowed to remain in place, and that he not be required to remove everything from the parking area each day, as the parking requirements were being met. The PEC determined that Mr. Garton's modifications to the parking plan did not have negative impacts and were acceptable. Attached are meeting minutes from t I he July 26, 1993 PEC meeting. 2) 09117/93 Noise Complaint - Vail PD responded to Garton's, reacting to complaint from a neighboring business. MW -1- Snoult uarvm will then appear at a DRB meeting on Wednesday, May 4,1994, to obtain approval for '71, T -- I Upon approvals being granted by the PEC and the DRB, Mr. Garton will appear before the Local Licensing Authority on Wednesday, June 8, 1994 to request a modification of the Garton's liquor licensed premise. 11 N In an effort to reduce noise in the Village Core, which stemmed from an unrelated incident, the Town Council has requested that the Town Attorney draft an ordinance amending the current amplified sound gwgu l,a-.T 9 yjr-,-elimmating the pirjLn.,M. of canned and/or live music to outdoor decks and other external areas, unless the entertainers are performing outdoors live. E 11 for the CCI I zone district to remove the requirement that television stations be visible from the street or pedestrian way, or whether they should reconfigure the design of the first floor of the Sunbird Lodge to allow for the retail expansion proposed. Kathy Langenwalter inquired whether the PEC had discussed this issue concerning TV-8 previously. Dalton Williams stated that Vail Associates had not done anything that they had proposed to do with the previous TV-8 request. He stated that curtains or blindsvere being used to control lighting. VMITMM_M� =- - tt , �Y 7 FE"AT and that lighting can be co�trolled through the use • tinted glass. Diana Donovan stated that she was against amending the definition of Commercial Uses in the CCII zone district as it pertains to television stations. Diana stated that she wantele to see the relief and shadow line maintained. Kathy Langenwalter stated that this proposal would still meet their criteria if viewing can occur from the south part of the building. F,athy Langenwalter stat nis the PEC had a responsibility to address design issues. Tim Devlin stated this proposal would provide for a net increase • 230 square feet • retail area and would require .76 parking spaces. Kathy Langenwalter stated that prior to the next PEC meeting concerning this item, that the applicant address the following issues: 1 .) review location of TV-8, 2.) review design details, 3.) setback for infill area, and 4.) the location • the planters. An update on the conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck located at Garton's Saloon, Lot P, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1 st Filing/1 43 Village Center Road. Applicant: Dave Garton Planner: Tim Devlin E rj7MMMM7.;j Juty 26, 1993 ff.] request for the establishment of an SDD to allow the redevelopment of the Cornice Building and a request for a conditional use permit to allow the construction of three Type IV employee housing units, located at 362 Vail Valley Drive and more ss- •• s-s as follows: A part of Tract "B" and a part o�411ill Creek R more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast comer of Vail Village, First Filing; thence North 79 West along the Southerly line of U.S. Highway No. 6 a distance of 367.06 feet to the Northeast comer of said Tract "B"; Planning and Environmental Commission 0 July 26, 1993 E TO: Planning and Environmental Commission DATE: July 26, 1993 SUBJECT: An update on the conditional use permit for an outdoor dining deck located at Garton's Saloon, Lot P, Block 5-D, Vail Village 1 st Filing/1 43 Village Center Road. E The purpose of this update is to allow the applicant to inform the Planning and Environment-"' Commission (PEC) how the outdoor dining deck/"ranch yard" at Garton's Saloon has been working out this summer. I MMMMEMMI�= 11 Packy thanked the PEC for their time. 3. A request for a conditional use permit to expand the hours of operation and add lights to the Lionshead Miniature Golf Course located at Tract D, Lionshead First Filing, between the Lionshead Center Building and the base • the B• rnfree Express Chairlift. Applicant: Charlie Alexander Planner: Jim Curnutte Jim Curnutte made a brief presentation per the staff memo and stated that staff was recommending approval • this request to amend a conditional use permit with two conditions: 1) that the operation's hours be limited to 10:00 p.m. at night, and 2) that the applicant upgrade the temporary building, i.e. new roof, siding, etc. Jim pointed out that the temporary building and lights would be taken to the DRB for their review. Applicant: Dave Garton Planner: Tim Devlin Planning and Environmental Commission April 6, 1993 Planning and Environmental Commission April 26, 1993 Jeff Bowen stated that the parking structure was not full most of the summer I except f'I the 4th of July and the bike races. He wondered whether it would be possib e for employees to park elsewhere during these times. Dave Garton stated that he would be sensitive to the parking situation at such times and explained that the whole idea of this project was predicated on the summer off - season. Diana Donovan stated that the they needed to determine what the total parking requirement was for Crossroads so that the PEC could be sure that they were making consistent decisions. Kathy Lan genwalter inquired how informed fellow tenants at Crossroads were of this proposal. Dave Garton stated that most tenants have responded enthusiastically. Bill Anderson stated that this request was for a conditional use permit and that the applicant was requesting the permit for a year and that it could be reevaluated at such time. Kristan Pritz stated that Club Majik's was given the option to valet park when they were at Crossroads but they never used Diana Donovan stated that if valet parking is used, that it should be available twenty- four hours per day. Dalton Williams stated that he wondered what would happen if the Christiania wanted to pursue a similar request. Kristan Pritz stated that the circumstances surrounding this proposal are different giveM Garton's proximity to the parking structure.. She also said that it was staff's feeling th distinctions could be made between the two situations (Garton's and the Christiania). i is Planning and Environmental Commission April 26, 1993 4 Jeff Bowen stated that they were looking at a time of the year when parking was generally not a problem. He also said that since they were only looking at grantinq th request for a year (June 1 - November 1) that they were not creating a hardship on other parties. I 1-1 eg Amsden asked the applicant whether there would be live music outside. Greg Amsden inquired whether the applicant had considered to have the proposed operation going during lunch hours. Shirkie stated that it would not be cost effective to do so. Greg Amsden stated that he had no objection to approving this request for a conditional use permit. Kathy Langenwalter stated that she had no objection to the conditional use permit but parking was a concern to her. She said that valet parking would be a workable solution for the loss of parking spaces during evening hours but wondered whether the storage of equipment would effect the availability of parking spaces. Planning and Environmental Commission April 25, 1993 5 if ilEUTY - Cangen , i-i'aftZrPUffTf"e — Le el i Diana Donovan stated that the situations do vary but that the underlying concept does not. She said that if they make an exception to the way they vote on this proposal that it will make it more difficult to say "no" next time. Kristan Pritz stated that continuity in decisions is important but that the individual circumstances of each situation deserved to be looked at as well. Jeff Bowen stated that the first issue that the PEC is concerned with is the project and that the second issue is to devise a parking stipulation that will allow the applicant to move forward. Diana Donovan stated that the PEC needed to keep in mind whether this request would be positive for the Town. Kristan Pritz inquired of in whether valet parking for two of the parking spaces during the day would be an acceptable solution to this situation. Dave Garton stated that it was not the most appealing solution but that he would be willing to do this. Diana Donovan stated that it was either valet parking • looking at the origin requirement for Crossroads. I AdIk Planning and Environmental Commission April 26, 1993 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Environmental Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: April 25, 1994 SUBJECT: A request for a worksession for a wall height variance to allow Block for a single family residence to be constructed at 2840 Basingdale/Lot 4, 9, Intermountain Subdivision. Applicant: Dan Frederick III. ZONING ANALYSIS Lot Size: .64 acre or 28,039 sq. ft. Zoning: Primary/Secondary Residential Allowed Pro osed Height: 33' 32.5' GRFA: 6,753.9 sq. ft. 1,071 sq. fl. Setbacks: Front: 20' 0' for garage, 20' for home Side: 15' 62' Side: 15' 35' Rear: 15, 65' Site Coverage: 4,205 sq. ft. (15%) 815 sq. ft. (3%) Landscaping: 10,823.4 (60%) 27,444 sq. ft. (98%) Parking: 2 spaces 2 spaces 0 1® _DESCRIPTION OF THE _REQUEST Ili. ZONING CONSID.ERATIONS As this is a worksession, staff has not analyzed the variance criteria. We have listed them below for the Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC) information. A. Con of Factors: _ 1 The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve treatment among sites in the vicinity compatibility and uniformity of or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and population, utilities, and public safety. B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special the limitations on other properties classified in privilege inconsistent with 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 to the same site of the variance that do not conditions applicable 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. 11 K c: \p ec \memos\frederic.425 c n l� 0 410c� ee - I _ 1 �- �- I 0 g U U f I � Y i ;J. U V h F l Fo 9 L-- F- I[Ell E im 02=1111:111110 11 The Town of Vail Engineer has requested that the face of the garage be located a mul distance of 24 feet from the edge of asphalt. This request is based upon the TowZs in n i ece for snow plowing and snow storage. The applicant's design meets the 24 foot requiremen Since the initial PEC worksession, and at the request of the PEC, the applicant has redesigned the parking layout to provide all the required parking on-site. Two parking spaces are proposed to be located within the garage, and two parking spaces would be located to the east and west sides of the garage, on the bridge deck. In order to provide all the required parking on-site, the applicant has widened the bridge deck (please see the attached site plan). According to the project architect, the widening of the bridge deck has created the need for a retaining wall to be located beneath the deck to support the road base (Sierra Trail). The - M 0 The following summarizes the zoning statistics for this requell D. GRFA: Allowable: Proposed: E. Site Coverage: Allowable Proposed *The staff has calculated the average slope beneath the building and the parking areas to b 33.7%. Because this average slope is greater than 30%, the property is restricted to a maximum site coverage of 15%. If the average slope had been less than 30%, the maximu site coverage would be I . . 1 0 • #ne free market dwelling unit and one Type I EHI (requires DRB approval) MROM 1,522 square feet (15%)* 1,983 square feet (19.5%) 0 Ill. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY The staff has researched the Town files with regard to previous reviews of projects of a similar nature. The following is intended to give the PEC an understanding of the review of previous actions: The applicant could remove a portion of the garage which would decrease site coverage. However, the staff's opinion is that it is preferable to have all of the required parking enclosed to avoid a view of parked cars and retaining walls." The PEC's motion for approval was per the findings listed in the staff memorandum with three conditions of approval. The conditions of approval dealt with the landscaping and revegetation proposed for the property. Because this is a worksession, the staff will not address eacff Section 18.6 2.060 • the Vail Municipal Code. The staff has provided the variance review criteria below for the PEC's evaluation: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity. 2. The degree to which relief from the strict 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 grant of special privilege. 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of 0 population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the followiaqlp� before granting a variance: 3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: The staff has identified the following issues and/or concerns which we believe should be a •,zsis for discussion at the worksession: ONEIRM-10 =I Does the PEC believe that there is a physical hardship on this property, and that there are special circumstances on this site that are unique to this property, such that support for the three variances can be granted? Staff feels that consideration should be given to the steep slopes on the site, and the distances (both horizontally and vertically) between the existing edge of asphalt and the applicant's southernmost property line. The staff does acknowledge that cutting a driveway onto this site would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, and that wall height variances and perhaps a driveway grade variance would be necessary in order to accomplish any type of reasonable grade for a driveway. 1 0 C. Site Coverage Does the PEC believe that the site coverage variance request meets the criteria? EIMM��" i A total of 15 mature aspens (4" circumference or larger) will be removed as a result of this project. Should the applicant be requested to eliminate the secondary unit in order to minimize site disturbance? This would reduce the total parking requirement down to two or three spaces, depending on the size of the dwelling unit. This would also eliminate the need for an expanded parking deck. 1 A revised site plan, which shall indicate all ridge lines for the roof, with associated elevations, to ensure that the structure meets the maximum allowable height of 33 feet. 2. A landscape and revegetation plan shall need to be submitted. 3. The property setbacks shall need to be indicated on the floor plans in order to determine the extent of the encroachment (GRFA) into the front setback. 4. A revised floor plan which indicates that there will be no internal connection between the primary and the secondary unit. This is a requirement of the Type I EHU. c:\pec\memos\pIavec-425 0 L L .•-r l ��� P. c.�F� ten/ \ � r � ca o T Z ARCHMOURE p. p. eOx 737 vA0., COLORADO 11 T ` � r'�A —i—isJ - � °'e`— �- K ® ® E�, �� *a< / / L- - Ij V co p 'W op P - FF- t0 a ----------------- ARCHITECTURE PLANNING P.O. 8 AIL, COLORADO 81118 0 W E r2 O F- 5047 Main Gore Circle Vail, Colorado 81657 E CLE INTERNATIO 11 kllLL i 7-W"-j-S June 16 - 17 1994 + Denver + Hy-att Tech Center j le 1 7, 1 994 4. Hyan Tech Center Denver �Ak (303) 321-6320 PHONE: IWO) V3-713i 1 W Piz lkftl . 1 4i0—!— , Awral � T. L E N T d Spahr .f' o • Co-Chair, an attorney with Ballar E)enver, ipeciallies im local 80vtrnrnent ama Wdrews ng" In A environmental l aw . ims, Green has written and lactuft'd t e on '1041' land use and water quality I.-Su0s. c - E N'C"E,