Loading...
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