HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-1113 PECTHIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
1:
Vlaar Residence - Discussion of a previous condition of PEC approval (Jim)
i
l 7:
1.
Christmas tree lot - 2313 N. Frontage d
.
Lodges at Timber Creek - 3/93 Timber Creek Drive
3.
Evergreen Lo - 250 S. Frontage Road West
4.
Lord Lati o Shop - A & D Building, 286 Gore Creek Drive
.
Tuchman Residence - 3110 Booth Creek Drive
Driver: Jim
EjLbqicHegrin
1
A request for a an additional 250 square feet to allow for an addition to the Tuchman
residence located at 3110 Booth Creek rive /Lot 9, Block 3, Vail Village 11th Filing.
Applicant: Mr. Tuchman
Planner: Jim urnutte
.
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a Christmas tree lot to be located at
2313 North Frontage Road/Lot 3, Block B, Vail Das Schone Filing 1.
Applicant: Dick Dilling represented by Steve Lincks
Planner: George Ruther
3.
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a telecommunications. antenn to be
installed at the Evergreen Lodge located at 250 S. Frontage Road West/Lot 2, Block 1
Vail Lionsead 2nd Filing.
Applicant: David Crispin representing estiner Corporation
Planner: George Ruther
4.
A request for a minor CCI exterior alteration to allow for the addition of a bay w - indow to
the Lord Lati o Shop located in the A & D Building, 286 Gore Creek rive /Lots A- D, Block
5, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: 286 Bridge Street, Incorporated, represented by Chamof ierson
Planner; Lauren Waterton
.
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow for a club to be located on the 3rd and t
floors of the Serranos Building located at 298 Hansen Ranch Road/Lot C, Block 2, Vail
Village 1st Filing.
Applicant.- Gretta Parks, represented I n Heelan.
Planner: Jim Curnutte
k
El
. MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
DATE: November 13,1995
111® CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Chapter 18.71 - Additional GRFA, the Community Development Department
recommends approval of the request for additional GRFA based upon the following factors:
A. Coni er tion of F ctorsa
Before acting on an application for additional GRFA, the Planning and Environmental
Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the proposed use,
1® _ Effect uoon the exi ti ai
xisi trc�o sw
The proposed additions will have minimal impact on the site, and neither
drainage nor grading on the property will be effected. Some low growing
bushes will be relocated in the areas of the entry and living room additions.
The additions will match the existing building (materials and colors) in
architectural character, and not appear out of place.
2. 1 of r ri �a
The proposed additions would not appear to have a negative impact on
adjacent properties.
s i rt ith t o To rt$ z hire r it rtt lio I
develoDmentgIandi1rds.
Section 18.71.020 (F) of the Town of Mail Municipal Code requires that any
dwelling unit that proposes to use Additional GRFA shall comply with the
standards outlined in the Town of Vail Design Review Guidelines. These
standards include landscaping, undergrounding of utilities, driveway
paving and general maintenance of the property.
Upon inspection by staff, we find that this property is in compliance with
the Town's zoning requirements and all applicable development standards.
During our site visit we did however, notice various peices of lawn furniture
located on the publicly owned stream tract directly behind this residence.
Staff recommends that this furniture be removed.
B. indinos:
The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before
granting approval for Additional GRFA®
1. That the granting of the requested Additional GRFA would not negatively
effect existing topography, vegetation, drainage and existing structures.
2. That the granting of. the requested Additional GRFA would not negatively
impact adjacent properties.
I
0
RIDGE 4 tfr
OSED M"
3ARAGE ROOF
?0'"IWMAr
IN
93
----------- _.------ _.w__.
LEV�
EL 83
==
r�
_ -
LPL
TRY
L If d,
war am
M GARAGE iWT MW
EXIST' T Y LEVEL
�. _.......�.�.
®.
...... ......
®
®j0a
I r'G AG LEVEL
®.�7a
EL ®,
FS LIVING LEVEL
NT F-Ol
8
6
�
0
EL 8302' -g'9
PROPOSED air HALP OP DUPLEX
gf
®
avarlo awar HALP op DuPLEx
®®®®®®. a®®. mo.®«®® w.o .. « ®m.e,m.w
® ® ®..a ® ® ®m. ® ® ® ®� ,«
6
1
B
®®®®®,«_®®®®..®®®. e®. m ®..,w » ® ® ® ® ® ® ® »..., ® ®.a.. ®-o,m ® )
NO R
Tt--�
EL EVA
T/%-.,"
0
RIDC°aE tJJGtJT
_ NEW L _T _ BEDROOM LE®EL
AMATPMMYS
NEVI MASTER BEDROOM LEVEL
�
®------- ------
_
To BE mmvnv * MEW
INTO
i
EX. BEDROOM LEVEL
B
EL l' °D®
-r-
_ �° _ PONT OP NX Lit
hEN
EXITS LIVW6 LEVEL
To MI
------ . .... ®._..a._._._,®,.® ®._._ ®.®..
k
EmarG LIVING LEVEL
gBg
�_ ®__» ®r »®
6
E ora T mALP L o
a
S aAar HALF DUPLEX
8
5 OU TH EL E VA
TION
5CALE.- 1 "1®
A0 1AT
ALL MW MAYMALS To MATCN Him mmu TAL TO MATCH 7'
HMO RWOF MAT MAO r Haw N T
4?L AND T T
DASHED LINE REPRESSEWTS
EXISTIO Roop
-------------------------
..... -------------------------
------------- - - -----------------
------------- - -----------------------
------ - ------------- =-Z. ---- ---------------------
--- - ---------- ---------- ---------
----------
EXIST'G DORMER - gMr
000 1 E4 - 831L1-01 "Ir
000
EXIST'G BEDROOM LL�T�
000 ------- — —
-----------
L*
--- 000 -- ----------- --------- EL - 831'4'-o
GARAW P-LEVA770M
P-var,G c.ARAoE To Rffwpwm 000
...... ----- EXIST ENTRY LEVEL
....... [Exlarc
I
MW ENTRY AREA
ADJ. WALL oll EXIST'G LIVING LEVEL
--- --------- I --------------- ------- --------- — ----------- ................
EL
PRoposw &Aar &De or DupL" smarz. gear we ot- Dumex
---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------
El
•
f: \everyone \pec \memos \mnas.nl3
Section 18.30.010, the purpose of the Heavy Service Zone District stat(I
the o
f: \everyone \Pec \memos \xmas.n13 2
1111. ABACKGROUND
In 1991, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved on iion l Use Permit for
Richard at e s to operate a Christmas tree lot on this site. The use was conducted t did not
resume the following year, since the applicant did not reapply for a Conditional Use Permit. No
complaints were filed, nor were there any problems associated with the 1991 Christmas tree lot
operation.
In 1994 Steve Lincs requested 1 -year Conditional Use Permit to allow for the operation of the
,Christmas tree lot. The Planning and Environmental Comm ission approved the 1 -year request
with 6 conditions of approval. The conditions of approval were as follows.
1. That the applicant secure a Home Occupation Permit and use not more than 500
s . ft. of the interior of his residence (garage) for storage of Christmas trees.
2. That small white decorative lights may be used on up to 4 trees in front of the
Christmas tree lot. Overhead strings of lights shall not be used.
. That the approval is valid for the month of December, 1994 only. If the applicant
would like to return and conduct a similar operation in subsequent years,
additional Conditional Use Permits will be required at that time.
4. That the split rail fencing be installed on all sides of the Christmas tree lot.
5. That the generator and lights be shut off by 10000 . each night.
6. That the generator must comply with all Town of Vail sound regulations.
The staff is unaware of any complaints or problems associated with last years operation.
III° CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
Upon review of Chapter 16.60, Conditional Use Permits, the Community Development
Department recommends approval of the applicant's requested Conditional Use Permit based
upon the following factors.:
° i rati r °
1. Relationship and impact of the use the v E t objectives
the Td
Section 18.30.010, the purpose of the Heavy Service Zone District stat(I
the o
f: \everyone \Pec \memos \xmas.n13 2
9
k
r]
•
In granting a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning and
Environmental Commission or the Town Council may prescribe
more restrictive development standards than the standards
adverse influences."
f:\everyone\pec\memos\xmas.n13
3
4, Effect upon the t r of the area in which the r is
be located, i Its i the ! e and bulk of the proposed use in
relation to rr n in
Staff believes that the proposed Blue Ridge Christmas Tree lot will
contribute to the festive character of the Town of Vailm We believe that
any of the items negatively associated with other Christmas tree lots will
not occur with this proposal, (i.e., excessively bright li hts, sl na e, semi-
truck trailers, etc. )¢
B. FindingE
The ! ri i f Envi
r e gran1:1na a conditignal Lise DerMlt.
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the purposes of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code and the purposes of the
district in which the site is located®
2. That the proposed location of the use and the conditions under which it
would be operated or maintained would not be detrimental to the public
health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable
provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code®
IV. SIAEEBEQQMMEMQAIM
Upon review of the proposed Conditional Use Permit to operate a Christmas tree lot on a portion
of the West Mail Texaco property, located at 2313 N. Frontage Rd., staff is recommending
approval s we believe the request meets the criteria as discussed above, as well as the
findings, Specifically, staff believes that Finding B1 is met as the proposal is in accordance with
the purposes of the Zoning Code and the Heavy Service Zone District. Finding 2 is met, in staff's
opinion, as there will be no detrimental impacts to public health, safety, or welfare nor will the
proposal be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Finding is met,
as the proposal complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Conditional Use Permit
section of the Zoning Code.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to grant the requested Conditional
Use Permit, the planning staff would recommend that the approval carry with it the following
conditions:
1. That the applicant secure a Home Occupation Permit and use not more than 500
s , ft. of the interior of his residence (garage) for storage of Christmas trees, The
Home Occupation Permit is required with each year of operation.
f:\everyone\pec\memos\xmas.n13 4
p
vwy?
> y
1
h �
�•�°' 1 �J � � "'E A (t .w n 5 � ."d
uy Mme!
]
� i � i ._i. ar
; $ ��' }! � }� d
°*a s
1 .r
F � �'3 � � �°. t
FIN
PUT
1
{�9
! i
'
wMM
�'ta® Degwr&4 D
P
rI
tom^
ite
MEMORANDUM
m
co
COED
EOEII
MCD
mm
c
., ....
MED
ED
ClIm
co
m,
tn
co
®�
-
cx
ca
LU
s
�
I
t
UM
Community Development Department
November 13, 1995
RE: A request for a minor CCI exterior alteration for a bay window addition to the Lord
Latigo Shop, located at the A & D Building, 286 Gore Creek Drive/Lots A and B and
part of C, Block 5-A, Vail Village 1st Filing.
Applicant: 286 Bridge Street, !no., represented by Chamois Pierson
Planner: Lauren Waterton
.................. ......
.................
® Vail Village Master Plan
The goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goal statements. Each major goal
focuses on a particular aspect of the Village community.
"Goal Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique
architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain a sense of community
and identity."
"Goal To foster a tourist industry and promote year-round economic health and
viability for the Village and for the community as a whole."
The proposed expansion will enhance the existing commercial use and is in character with
the existing architectural scale of the Village.
"Goal 3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking experience
throughout the Village."
The addition of the window will increase visibility of this store and will add to the pedestrian
experience.
"Goal 4 To preserve existing open space areas and expand green space
opportunities."
The proposed building expansion displaces the existing landscape planter located at the
front of the store. An additional planter is proposed along the northeast corner of the
building to mitigate the loss of the exiling planter.
"Goal 5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the
transportation and circulation system throughout the Village."
The proposed remodel should have no effect on transportation and circulation in the
Village.
"Goal 6 To ensure the continued improvement of the vital operational elements of
the Village."
The proposed improvements o not impact access, maintenance and delivery activities in
the vicinity of the project.
. Streetscape Master Plan
The Golden Bear redevelopment implements the recommedations of the Streetscape
Master Plan for this property. No additional recommendations are needed to be
implemented.
4. Vail Village Design Considerations
The following is a discussion with the application's compliance with the Urban Design
Considerations and the architectural /landscape considerations expressed in the Vail Village
Design Considerations planning ocu ent.
r e i n nai i
. Pedestrian ip ti n:
"Pedestrian Streets-limited vehicular traffic"
Gore Creek Drive is a 25 to 35-foot wide section of asphalt, with an
additional 6 to 8 feet of concrete pavers on each side. This width is more
than adequate to accommodate the current ix of pedestrian and vehicular
traffic. The bay window will not extend into the pedestrian area any further
than the existing planter. The street width will not be impacted.
B. Vehicular Penetration
"in conjunction with pedestrian ization objectives, major emphasis is
focused on reducing auto penetration into the center of the
Village... Road constrictions, traffic circles, signs and other measures
are indicated in the guide plans to visually and physically discourage
all but essential vehicle penetration."
The addition of a bay window will not impact vehicular penetration.
C. Streetscape Framework:
"To improve the walking experience, to give continuity to the
pedestrian ways, as a continuous system, two general types of
improvements adjacent to the walkways are considered:
t . Open space and landscaping
The applicant is replacing the landscape planter with an additional planter on
the northeast corner of the building. This additional planter will not
adversely constrict any pedestrian way.
2. Infill commercial store fronts"
Because the existing store is setback slightly from the street and the rest of
the A & D Building, the bay window will bring the store out to the same plane
as the Golden Bear, adding to the continuity of the building.
D. Street Enclosure:
"While building facade heights should not be uniform from uil i to
building, they should provide a 'comfortable'. enclosure for the street."
The proposal will not directly affect facade height.
5
E. Street
"Buildings in the Village ore should form a strong but irregular edge
to the street."
The addition of a bay window on the north elevation of this building will add
to the irregular edge of the street. The approved improvements for the
Golden Bear Shop will include landscape planters along the north elevation
that are the same general shape as this proposed bay window (see
Attachment ).
F. Building Height-
The application does not impact this consideration.
Views G. o { Points-
The application does not impact this consideration.
H. Service and Delivery:
The proposal will have no impact on existing loading and delivery services.
E. u
Due to the existing height and orientation of the building, the addition of the
proposed building area will not extend shadows or interfere with adjacent
property's light.
ro i ur i� c n i tin
A. Roofs
The roof over the bay window is proposed to be copper.
B. Facades
"Transparency
Asa measure of transparency, the most characteristic and
successful ground floor facades range from 55% to 75% of the total
length of the commercial facade.®'
Because the bay window is replacing an existing window, this proposal does
not change the transparency of the facade.
"Windows
For close-up casual pedestrian viewing, in ows are typically designed to
human-sized dimensions. Ground floor display windows are typically raised
6
y
5ACKGROUND AND DES IPTION . ; . REOUEST
1
�s
C. Lounge area where members could have a drink, make a call, send a fax-, and
D. Up to three meeting and/or dining rooms.
The 4th floor is anticipated to be the "living room on the mountain." This is an area where
members could sit by the fire and relax, meet with friends and family, have an appetizer and a
drink.
This Conditional Use Permit request does not involve a_ny exterior changes to the previously
approved building.
The original approval of the errano's redevelopment included a restaurant an "private club"
on the 2nd floor of the building. The applicant has indicated that that portion of the 2nd floor
currently labeled as private club, will be used as additional dining for the 2nd floor restaurant.
Since this entire area was calculated as a restaurant for parking purposes, there will be no
additional impacts associated with the proposed change in use.
1® RBACKAROQND
On March 13, 1995, Glen Heelan, the project developer, received PEC approval to demolish the
existing errano's Building and replace it with a new structure. (Please see attachment 1, site
plan, elevation drawings and floor plans of the approved building). The building program
included.-
Commercial uses and a potential nightclub in the basement.
Retail uses on the 1 st floor°
Restaurant uses on the 2nd floor.
Two offices and a portion of a condominium on the 3rd floor®
The remainder of the condominium on the 4th floor.
In addition to these uses, walkway and landscape improvements on the north, east and south
sides of the building were approved, as well as a 2nd floor outdoor dining deck over the Hansen
Ranch Road right -of -way,
To accomplish the above described proposal, a CCI Major Exterior Alteration and the following
variances were required:
1 A setback variance for an 11 -foot encroachment into the -foot stream
setback for Mill Creek (for the basement floor only);
2. A variance for common area of 78.9% (35% is allowed by zoning).
Also, the following two conditional use permits were required:
1. An outdoor dining deck on the second floor; an
2. Office space on the third floor.
The project was reviewed and ultimately approved by the Vail Town Council and the Design
Review oar in the Spring of 1995.
2
Policy: Activity that provides night life and evening
entertainment for bath the guests and the
community shall be encouraged.
Objective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial
facilities to better serve the needs of our guests.
In the C I Zone District, "meeting rooms" may be approved ; s a
Conditional Ilse, only in the basement or garden level an on the 2nd level
of a building. They are not allowed, s a permitted or conditional use, on
the 1 st floor or street level or any level of a building above the 2nd floor.
Since the applicant's request includes the proposed use of a portion of the
3rd floor for meeting and/or dining roams, staff as concerned with
authorizing a use which is specifically ro t ited on this level of a building
in the CCI Zane District. The applicant has responded to staff's concern
by committing that the meeting rooms will be used solely by club
members, and therefore, can be considered as accessory to the functions
of the club. The club members, as a group, will not rent the rooms to the
general public.
2m The effect of the use n light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, uiliti s, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, n other public facilities
Staff Response - Staff believes that the proposed change in use from
residential and office use to a club will have no negative effect on any of
the above listed criteria.
. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive
and ri and convenience, tra is flow and control,
access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from tr t and
parking areas.
Staff saonse - Staff believes that the proposed change in use from
residential and office use to a club will have no negative effect on any of
the above listed criteria.
® Effect upon the character r in which the r c use is
be located, including the sc I n d bulk of the r use in
relation to surrounding usese
Slaft3sapgnj sa - As mentioned previously, there will be no external
changes made in conjunction with this proposed change in approved uses
of the 3rd and 4th floors of the Serrano's Building. Therefore, there will be
no changes in the scale and bulk of the building previously reviewed n
proved by the PEC, Town Council and Design Review Board. With
regard to the change in use and its effect on the character of the area,
staff believes that the proposed change fro one large residential
condominium unit and two small office spaces, to a club, could have the
effect of providing more activity and therefore a livelier feel to the Village,
which is a goal of the Town.
4
The food and beverage elements associated with the club appear to be
minimal and can be accommodated through the deliveries that would
already occur in relation to the restaurant on the 2nd level.
5. Development of public spaces for use by pedestrians,
toff es on - The proposed club will have no effects positive or
negative, on public spaces for use. by pedestrians.
6. Continuance aft the various commercial, residential, and public uses in
Commercial Core I District so as to maintain the existing character of the
areas
Staff es onse - Staff believes that the proposed club use would continue
the various commercial and public uses in the CC I Zone District.
Approval of the club would displace the previously approved dwelling unit
from the property, however, since the Serrano's Building does not currently
have a dwelling unit in it, (only an approval for one large condominium to
be built), the proposed club will not change the xis in character of the
area. In staff's opinion, the replacement of the approved condominium
unit with a club is a positive change, as it would appear to offer the
opportunity to provide a more active and lively feel to the Village, and to
provide additional services and amenities for the Town's guests.
7. Control quality of construction, architectural design, and landscape design
in Commercial Core 1 District so as to maintain the existing character of
the area
Staff Response -the applicant has stated that no exterior changes will be
made to the building in association with the proposed club. Staff was
concerned however, that depending on the scope of the food service
element of the private club, it may be necessary to add additional
mechanical equipment related to any new or expanded kitchen area. in
response to this concern, the applicant has assured staff that all food
preparation activities associated with the crab will be handled in the
kitchen of the restaurant, located on the 2nd floor of the building.
3, Effects of noise, odor, dust, smoke, and other factors on the environment
of Commercial Core I District,
Sta es onse - Staff believes that none of the elements listed above will
be a concern related to the proposed club use of the 3rd and 4th floor, with
the possible exception of noise® This issue was a concern during the initial
discussion of the building's redevelopment, related to the possible bar use
in the building. The solution to that discussion was that noise levels will
be adequately addressed through the Town's existing noise ordinances,
and staff believes those measures are appropriate for the proposed club
as well.
m
m
®.°
FLOOR ARfA Cat
,m
pp gg
W6 6f.
. l
s d °sr
sae yr. s • V•
6A W3
s• sr
•
ML
IAA
o.°
AIOIT
I
'TNT
®
I
MIYAT
1
°
I
°
'
I
KLMUEN
WH eaaxr 8suam one.
di KeeCseee �ggP 81.
e ®
N, e
���®
Wat
mm ®maxvo
rmr
MUM
wu®vam
®mmmm mom m ®amm
omzow
�°�°
A ®,
mm
m=ma
�® ® ®mamm o® mwm�o ®ma�uv
� �� •>�mam mmmammm.mmee
mm. mavemmmvw om�
�.
In
HOD 1141111,11111
M-
4
I
i
LF,
b
i IN
IIe II
The applicants are now requesting that the PEC approve the following changes-
A) A change to the approved phasing plan-,
) A slight shift in the locations of Units 1, 16, A and B,
) An increse in GRFA, site coverage and a height for Units A thru ; and
) A minor decrease in the amount of parking provided.
Units 11, 1, 1, 14, G and H have already been constructed. On October 9, 1995 the applicant
submitted a building permit application for Units 15 and 16. Staff rejected the applicants' buil in
permit application since Units 15 and 16 are a pert of Phase III of the development. According to
a PEC condition of approval, the applicants must dedicate 2 HU's prior to the issuance of
building er it for any units in Phase Ill. The applicant does not wish to deed restrict the
existing units G and H, thus, staff could not issue the requested building permits.
The applicants wish to revise the phasing plan as follows. Units 15, 16, E and F would be
constructed next summer. Units 17, 169 C and D would be built in the summer of 1997. When
the permits are pulled for Units an , the applicants would sign deed restrictions for these
units. The applicants are not sure that they will build Units A and B, but if they do, these units
would be deed restricted, so that the total project density would not exceed the original density
approved by Eagle County.
Ill. ZONING ANA' Y-ql-q
This analysis compares the current proposal with the January 1, 1994 PFC approved
development plan, and the limiting zoning parameters derived from either the annexation
agreement or the RIC zone district.
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT CURRENT
fiEZ®NINaJALLQALBLE} 1!10!94 PEC PLAN PROPOSAL
Site Area: 222,849 sq. ft.
Buildable Area: 166,277 sq. ft.
GFA: 45,169 sq. ft. 12,212 sq. ft. (existing mufti-family) 12,242 sq. ft.
25.024 sq' ft. (duplexs) 26,257 sq. ft. (+ 1,233 sq. %)
37,236 sq. ft. total 38,469 sq. ft.
Density: 24 multi-family units 10 multi-family units
12 duplex units 24 total units
4 Ty _611 EMU's f4l2 each)
24 units total
ighte 33 ft. 34'6" Lg. units 31'6" Lg. units
27°8" 3m. units 29 °4" 3m. units (+ 1'S")
Site Coverage: 57,712 sq. ft. 24,101 sq. ft. 24,445 sq. ft. (+ 344 sq. ft,)
Parking: 52 spaces 89 spaces approved 86 spaces (® 3 spaces)
56 spaces required
3 surface spaces in driveways were lost due to shifting of units toward the cul -de -sac.
2
The applicants also seek to shift Units A and B four feet to the north, so that these units can be
enlarged (see attachment ) without interfering with the recorded utility easement that runs
between Emits B and C. Staff has no problem with these proposed changes.
C. GRFA SITE COVERAGE AND BUILDING I I ASES
The applicants ish to raise the roof height, add third-level lofts and deepen the footprint of the
remainder of the smaller units (A thru ) by 2 feet. The height increase proposed is 20 inches or
2 log courses. GRFA would increase by 1,233 square feet. Site coverage would increase by
344 square feet. The proposed GRFA additions and building shifts would eliminate 3 surface
parking spaces in driveway areas. According to the zoning analysis, the project is well below the
zoning allowances for GRFA, site coverage, and height. Thus, staff has no problem with these
proposed changes.
D. I
The building shifts and enlargement of the smaller duplex footprints outlined above, result in the
loss of usable parking spaces in front of 3 units. The lost spaces were marginally acceptable to
begin with, and their loss will have little effect on the project due to the excess parking that the
development plan contains. Staff has no problem with these proposed changes.
Staff recommends approval of the applicants' request to shift the locations of units 1, 16, A and
B. Staff recommends approval of the applicants' requests to increase the GRFA, site coverage
and building height of units A thru F. Staff recommends approval of the applicants' request to
amend the parking plan. Staff recommends denial of the applicants' request to amend the
phasing plan and EHU deed restriction requirements.
F: /everyone %Sec /memos /ogilby. 113
ulwa
zzz i9
ss
x
f
MAl
r 20 .
A A"'T
3!�SPES'
� 7
ulwa
zzz i9
ss
x
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Greg Moffet
Henry Pratt
Jeff Bowen
November 13, 1995
out=
Dalton Williams
Kevin Deighan
STAFF PRESENT-
N��
,ra Tuchman said she did not know who the lawn furniture belonged to, but would be happy to
ove it.
Rick Rosen, legal counsel to the owners of the west side of the duplex (Diane Hughes, her
daughter and King Hughes), asked what exactly the PEC would be talking about today.
Reaching an agreement between the Tuchmans and the Hughes, regarding the remaining
square footage for the lot is his concern. He pointed out that prior to the meeting a verbal
agreement was reached.
Jeff Bowen asked if we should table this item.
Bob Armour said the PEC does not want to render a decision that will end up in court, so he
agreed with Jeff that the application should be tabled to allow the two parties to reach an
agreement regarding the remaining GRFA on the property.
Rick Rosen said he did not want to cause a delay to the Tuchmans. He asked the Board if they
would table this request.
Greg Amsden said the next meeting was the 27th of November. It might hurt the process, but he
wants a formalized agreement reached between the two owners.
Debra Tuchman said if an agreement can't be reached, then we will be delayed. She doesn't
want to end up in court either. She said she hasn't seen the agreement, only heard that it exists.
This is becoming a catch 22 situation.
11
The motion was seconded by Henry Pratt.
Bob Armour made a recommendation that the DRB look at this closely.
Fianner, jim uurnutte
M
D
Bob Armour asked if club/private club can be found in other districts.
Mike Mollica stated that a private club is listed in 5 other Zone Districts.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
November 13, 1995
6
Jim Curnutte explained other uses that an applicant could apply for a Conditional Use Permit for
the CCI Zone District.
Jim Lamont said the removal of the upper floor residential units changing the character of the
neighborhood. The precedent that has been set affords a balance of commercial and residential.
Greg Amsden said the commercial use on the upper floors can't compete with the commercial on
the first floor.
Jim Lamont said one of the goals of the core area is that it should not lose sight of the mixed
use.
Mike Mollica stated that the purpose section of the CCI Zone District encourages mixed use in
the Village, but not specifically in each building.
Glen Heelan said he thought it a better situation for all involved to use this space better.
Planning and Environmenial Commission
Minutes
November 13, 1995
Greg Moffet asked what percentage would be full members in the club.
Glen Heelan said that 10 percent would provide the economic affordability to be able to do this
club.
Greg Arnsden mentioned that The Club across the street charges a fee. He would like to see
some assurance that it stays public.
a
Stan Cole said yes, we got 26 units, instead of the originally approved 24.
Planning and Environmental Commission
Minutes
November 13, 1995
0
Bob Armour said when this came through the first time, the EHU dedication was tied to Phase III
building permits.
Stan Cole stated that he wanted to deed restrict the 5th and 6th small units when they are built
and no EHU's would be dedicated until such time.
Kathy Langenwalter, acting as an agent for the owner, said there was discussion about 2 large
and 2 small units being a phase. All that is happening now is that 2 large units is a phase, The
intent of the 1994 phasing plan was that 8 units must be out there before the deed restricted
units are required. We are asking for building permits for the 7th and 8th units.
nothing left for the Design Review Board to approve.
W
TABLED UNTIL NOVEMBER 27,1995
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479-2114 voice or 479-2356
TDD for information. 11