The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-1012 PEC THiS iTEM MRY AFFEGT YOUR PROPERTY PIJBLIC NOTICE ~ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Envirnnmental Gommissian of the Town of Vai1 will hald a public hearing in accordance with Sec#ion 12-3-6 of the Municipal Code af the Town of Vai1 on Uctober 12, 1998, at 2:00 P.M. in the Tawn of Vaii Municipa! Bui(ding. In consideration of: R request for additional GRFA, utilizing the 250 ordinance, to allaw for a residential addition, located at 1522 Buffehr Creek Rd. ! The Valley Candos #A-26. applicant: Sherman Milier, represented by Barbara Duncan & Mike Perkin P(anner: Jeff Hunt A request for a worksession to discuss the estab6shment of a Special Development District, to aIlow for a commercia( expansion, located at 680 W. Lionshead Placel Lot 3, Block 1, Lionshead Third Filing. Applicant: Antfers Condominium Associatiari, represented by Robert LeVine Planner: Dominic Mauriello A joint meeting with the Design Review Board to review and provide a final recornmendation on the Lionshead Master Plan. Applicant. Town of Vail Plpinner: Dominic Maurislla, representing the Lionshead Masfer Plan Team The applica#ions and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during ~ regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Tawn of Vail Communify Development Department, 75 South Frontage Raad. Sign language interpre#ation available upon request with 24 hour no#ification. Please call 479- 2356, Telephane for #he Hearing Impaired, for information. Cammunity Development Department F'ubiished September 25, 1998 in the Vail Trail. ~ *VAIL TdWA' Updated 8l26 l i am PGANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL ~ Monday, C7ctober 12, 1998 AGENDA PrOlect prientatian ! NO LUNCH - Communitv Development Department 1:30 p,m. MEME3ERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1 •30 p.m. 1. Miller - 'i522 Buffehr Creek Road Driver: Dominic . iVUTE: lf the PEC hea(ng exkends until 6:00 p.m., the board will break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearinci - Tawn Cauncil Chambers, 2.00 p.m. ~ 1. A request far additional GRFA, u#ilizing the 250 ordinance, ta allow for a residential additian, located at 1522 8uffehr Creek Rd. ! The Valley Condos #A-26. Applicant. Sherman Miller, represented by Barbara Duncan & Mike Perkin Planner: Jeff Hunt 2. A final review of proposed text amendments to the Town of Vail Zoning f:egula#ions addressing the regulation of Gross Residentia: lr':vor Area (GRFA) in the Multi-Farrrily Zane Distriets. Applicant: Tawn of Vni1 p1wMar: George RutherlDominic Maurr-_ilo 1) A reques# for a wom.,~assion to u~scuss the establishment of a Special Development C3istrict, #o allow for a commercial expansion, tocated a# 680 W. Lionshead Placet L.at 3, Black 1, Lionshead Third Fiiing. Rpplicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Robert LeVine Planner; Dominic Mauriello TABLED UNTIL OC1"OBER 26. 1 998 5. lnformation Update ffr C?ctober 2& ~ Tawn Council 1 PEC joint meeting . Introduction ofLionshead Master Plan Docunzent (Draft plan available far public revieur) 6. Approval of September 28, 1998 minutes. a 1 7YIlYNOF1+A1G tlpdated 8126 t l am The applications and information about #he praposals are availab]e for public inspection during regular office hours in the project planner's affice Icacetod at the Town of Vail Cflmmunity ~ Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Sign lunguage interpretation availeble upon requestwith 24 hour notification. Please oal( 479-2356, Telephone for ttte Hearing impaired, #or information. Community Development Deparkment Published October 9, 1998 in the Vail Ttaif. ~ ~ a. 2 t3pdatec18726 11 arn PLANNtNG QNd ENVIRC?NMENTAL CC}MNtISS{ON ~ Monday, Octaber 12, 1998 FINAL AGENDA Pro°~ect Urientation 1 NO LUNCH - Comunitv Develop_ment Department 1:30 p,m. MENlBER s PRESENT ME.MBERS ABSENT , Greg Moffet John Schcrfield - Galen Aasland Diane Golden (ieft at 2:20 p.m.) Ann Bishop Br'ian Qayon Tom iNeber Site Visits : 1:30 p:m. 1. Miller -1522 Buffehr Creek Roact Driver: Dominic ~ NOTE. If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board wili break finr dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m. Public Hearing - 7own Council Chambers 2:00 p.rn. 1. A request for additiana{ GRFA, utifizing tne 250 ordinance, #o a11ow for a residential addition, Ioca#ed af 1522 Buffehr Creek Rd. / The Val{ey Condos #A-26. ApPlicant: ShermanMiHer, represented by Barbara Duncan & Mike F'eckin Planner; Jeff Hunt _ MOTIUN: John Scho#ield SECOND: Diane Galden V(JTE: 7-0 APPRQVEC} W1TH 1 AMENt)ED GC1iVDITtC3N: I . That if the additian is constructed within 6' frvm any existing struc#ure, #hen compliance with buifding codes regarding fire spread wi11 be required. 2. A final review of proposed text amendments to the Town of Vai! Zaning Regulations addressmg the regulation of Gross Residential Flaar Area (GRFA) in #he Mu1ti-Family Zone C}istricts. Rpplicant: Tawn o# Vaii Planner: George Ru#her/Dominic Maurielio , MOTION: .lahn Schofie{d 5ECOND: E3rian aoyon VOTE. 7-0 ~ RECOMMENDED APPRO'V"AL - of changes ta a11ow muiti family interior conversions, ~ anWr~o~~~ntc Updated 8J26 11am MOTION. Jahn Schofie[d SECC?ND: Gaien Aasland Vt7TE. 7-0 RECtJMMENQED DEVIAL - of changes ta the 250 Section, allowing exterior ~ additions to multi-famiiy dweilings. Recommended that if tFte Town wants to incentivize redevelopment of multipte family developments, that a meaningful ordinance with incentives be developed instead of complicating the 250 +Drdinance. 3. R request for a worksessian to discuss the es#ablishment af a 5pecial Development District, #a ailaw far a commercial expansion, located at 680 W. Lionshead Placel Lo# 3, Block 1, Lionshead Third Filing. App{ieant: Arttlers Candominium Assaciatiun, represented by Robert LeVine Planner: Dominic Mauriello TABLED UtVTIL C3GTOBER 26, 1998 5. lnformatian Update Qctober 20'h . Tawn Council / 1'EG joint meeting Intradtzction of Lionshead Master P1an Document (Draft plan avaalable for public review) 5. Approval of September 28, 1998 minutes. Thc applicatians and 'onformation about the prapasals are available for public inspectian during regular office hours in the project planner's a#fiice lacated at the Town of Vail Cammuni#y ~ Deveiopment Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Sign language interpretation available upon reqtaest with 24 haur nofif€catinn. Please ca11479-2356, Teiephane for the Hearing lmpaired, for information. Community deveiopment CDepartment ~ 2 MEMflRANDUM TQ. Planning and Environmental Commission FROIUI: Department of Community Development DATE: October 6, 1998 SllBJECT: A request for a residential addition ufilizing fhe 250 Ordinanee fo afCow for an expansion #o an existing unit lacated at 1522 Buffehr Creek RoadlUnit A-26, The Va1ley Phase 1(The Valley Condos). Applicant: Sherman R. Milfer IV Planner: Jeff Hunt . E3ACKGFtOUND AND DESCRIPTIUN OF THE REQUEST In 1985, #he Vail T"own Council approved Ordinance 4, Series af 4985, which created a new Chapter (18.71) ta the Vail Municipal Code, entitled "Additional Gross Residential Fionr Area," The purpose of the Additional GRFA Ordinance is ta provide an inducement far the upgrading of existing dwellings units, which have been in existence for a period of at least #ive years, by perrrtitt'tng up to two hundred fi€ty (250) square feet of GRFA (beyond fhe maximum allowance) ta be added to a dwelling unit. Certain criteria must be met in arder to allow the additional GRFA. ~ ln August 1995, the Town Council appraved Ordinance 6, Series of 1595, which amended Chapter 18.71 by eliminating the abiGty to use the additianal GRFA when a dwelling uni# is a "demotrebuifd." The 1995 Ordinance a(so requires fhaf all requests for additional GRFA, that involve ex#erior changes #o a building, be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Enviranrvzental Gommission. Unit Ae26 is a single family structure lacated in the Valley Condos. With this proposal, the applicants are requesting the addition af approximately 133 square feet of GRFA by adding a bedroom on #he ground level. The applican#s are alsa proposing to replace the existing deck with a new deck, but this woufd not affect GRFA. The addition will be finished in the same color and with the sarne materials to match the existing building. The proposal compiies wi#hall other zoning reguirements. See attached plan for more detail. 11. ZONING ANALYSIS The Valley Phase 1 was canstructed under the jurisdiction of Eagle Courtty. The property is zonet! Resaaential Cluster by the I'own. The development exco.-ded the mum C!7A allowable by the Town, however, since it v+ras annexed to the Town with an accepted paa,'i, the exisriny c:onaitions are ctrnsidered legal qnd non-cnnf~rming Each uni# ,,f : ser is enfitled to apply for additional GRFA under the 250 ordinance. 1lt. CR1TERIA AND FIIVC3INGS Upon review flf Chapter 18.71 - Additional GRFA, the Communi#y Development Deparfinent ,e.:ommends approval of this reques# for additianal GRFA based upnn the following factars: ~ A. Consideration Qf Factors: x 1 Before acting on an application for additionai GRFA, the Planning and Environmental Commission shall consider the following factors with respect #a the proposed use: 1. Effect upan the exis#inq #opoqraphy9 vege#ation, drainage and existinq struatures. The proposed addition would be on virutally flat terrain. No trees or other significan# vegetatian would be a€fected. The addition should have no effect on drainage. It is estimated that the addition wauld be about T from an existing structure ta the east. Shouid the additian be within 6' of the adjacent structure, therr building codes would be triggered regarding fire spread. A condition of approval should be that if the additian is cons#rucfed 6' from any existing structure, then compliance with building codes regarding fire spread will be required, 2. Impact an adjacent properties. 7he proposed addition is to a residence #hat is in the middle of the subject parcel and not near any praperty lines. The addition wi11 not have a negative impact on adjacent properties. 3. Camptiance wi#h the Town's zoninq requiremen#s and applicable devetop,ment standards. Section 18.71.020 (F) of the Town of Vail Municipal Code rsquires that any dwelling unit that proposes to use Additional GRFA shall camply with the ~ standards outlined in the Tawn of Vail aesign Review Guidelines. These standards include landscaping, undergroundirtg of utilities, driveway paving and general main#enance of the properfy. The site has paved parking and adequate Ianclscaoing. Alf utilities are iacated undergraund. Findinas: The PIanning and Environmental Commission should make the following findings before granting approval for Addifianal GRFA: 1. That as coriditioned, the granting of the requested Additional GRFA wi11 not negatively affect existing tapogcaphy, vegetation, drainage and existing ~tt ut;tui t~s. 2. ~ji" ~ ~le niii ~ ° of t~'1e I'@'''W ,.cP'! .4.dd!#iC~TIc"~3l GRFA i"ti1F 11(1# tl~'g'~1 t(VC: y impact adjacent properties. 3. That the granting of the requested Additional GRFA will comply with Town zoning requirements and applicable deveiopment standards as they apply to 110i1COnfOfm4tlq Sffes aI1d Stri ir,fi.trAc IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATIC?N The Community Deve(4pment Gepartment staff recommends approval of this application for ~ Additional GRFA subjecf to the following fiindings: ~ , 2 ~ 1. That as conditioned, the granting of the requested Addi#ional GRFA will ~ not negatively affecf existing topography, vegetation, drainage and existing structures. 2. Tha# the granting of the reauested Additiana! GRFA will not negatively impact adjacent properties. 3. That the granting of the requested Additional GRFA will comply with Town zaning requirements and applicable development standards as they applY #a nancon#orming sites and s#ructures. recammE.ndation is also subjec# tfl #he follawing condition: 1. Thaf if #he addition is constructec( 6' from any existing structure, then compliance with buitding codes regarding fire spread wi{l be cequired. F:leveryonelpeclmemos198\miller ~ ~ a 3 s . ~ . V-6" 1A,l. ~ ~ ~ ~ eW11NG Mt7MM #2 FOi~'r mt?w+DM #!5 ~ (GM+''S 1'n plAW0M1 M?+1) WVII 2-m-f3 P" C1"O MltIM ~ - "5" t... ~ ~ ~,.+iVLi _Clil J l~fJ ~.7 ~ v{! ~ ~ ~L.1 51UJ ~ mvwom 21-6-II 2" /211 ~ !Hl2" 10'411 5-i/2" W2" c? 4 ~ ~ IN MOWeXl511Nta FZNKKH FAW AM NOM: SM Cf MO''05W OtM7M 1~ 1N5 ~t~G1~1QN l~?#S~1N I5 I~ ~QRJt~ (0Rot./aWm 5MAM&OVOOR) WNMM511K,-" MWAN Wk ~ 5~ale, l l 4" . P . , . , ~ MEM4RAlVC?UM ~ TU: Planning and Enviranmental Commission FRC7M: Community Development Departmerit DATE; actober 12, 1998 SUBJECT: A request for a.finai review af a propased text amendment ta the Town af - Vaii Zaning Regulations addressing the regulation Qf Gross Residential , Floar Area {GaFA} in the Muiti-family Zone Districfs. Applicant: Town of Vail . Planner: George Ruther ' 1. DESCRIPTION QF THE REQUEST At the request of the Vail Tovvn Council, the Commurtity Development Departmen# has been asked ta initiate revisions ta the Town of Vail Zaning Reguiations address6ng #he regufat4an of Gross Residential Floar Area (GRFA) inthe multi-family zone districts. Specifically, the Cpuncil requested that the implementation of the existing 250 CJrdinance and the newly created interior Ctinversion regulation be revised to a11aw greater fiexibiiity in the mul#i-family zone districts, and ta create consistency in the implementatian of ~ additional GRFA among afl the residential zone districts. Ta aecomplish this task, revisions wouid need to be made to Sectians 12-15-4 (interior conversions) and 12-15-5 (additional GRFA) of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations. All changes to the Zaning Regulations require a review and a recommendatian from the Planning and Environmental Cammissinn and two readings of an amending ordinance by the "Cown Council. _ The #ollowing changes are being proposed ta Section 12-15-4 (interiar eonversions): ? Secfion 12-15-4 B, B1 - Add Muf#iwfamify ciwe!}ing units #o alloweddweiling tY~es, + Section 12-15-4 B2 - Amend language to aHow interior conversions in aii structures with the exception of employee housing units. ?Section 12-15-4 B3 - Ramoue provisior? not permitting ir?terior conversions to multi- family dwe!)ing units. The foliowing changes are being proposed to Section 12-95-5 (additianal GRFA)_ s 5ection 12-15-5 C 5-- Amend language to remove the requirement that the #irst application for additional GRFA be responsible for Guideline Compliance, as #his requirement will no langer be appiicable since the entire project must aPPlY simuitaneausly for the utilization of additiona! GRFA. 1 4VAIL TON~V' ~ ? Section 12-15-5 C 6- Amend the language to include a requirement that the ~ condominium association or a similar goveming body shall make application for the utilization of additionai GRFA an behalf of each of the individua9 dwel4ing urtit owners. ? Section 12-15-5 C 7- Remove language that prohibits exterior additions to multi- #amily s#ructures when utilizing the additional GRFA. ? Section 12-15-5 C-Amend language to inc0ude arequirement that the use of additionai GRF'A by individual dwelling unit owners, pursuant to the additional GRFA provisions, is permitted only when 100°fo of the awners in the structure are also propasing to utilize their additional CRFA as well. The intent being that when - exterior additions are proposed to a multi-family structure, the addition of the GRFA is cSesigned and develaped in context of the entire structure. ? Sectian 12-15-5 D 1- Add language requiring that apptications for additional GRFA sha11 be submitted by the condaminium association or a s?miiar governing body. ?Sectian 12-15-5 D 2- Amend language to provide for the review of additiona! GRFA applications by the besign Ftev'rew Board or administratively, in accordance with the Design Review Board review and hearing procedures. ? Section 12-15-5 D 3 b- Amend language to establish that applications for additional GRFA are reviewed by #he Design Review Board or administratively. 11. BACKGROUND ~ On September 15, 1998, staff met with the Vail Town Council. The purpase of the meeting was to ir?#orm the Council of the Planning & Environmental Commission's meeting on September 14 regarding the proposed text amendments and to get the Councii's input on the prapasai. Follawing discussian with #he Gouncil, staff was directed ta draft an ardinance allowing interior conversions m multi-family stnactures artd permitting exterior GRFA additions to muCti-family structures utilizing additianal GRFA (250). The exterior additions would be allowed provided that afl of the dwel(ings units within the multi-famify structure propose additians which are architecturafly compatible and that the design of the additians is developed with the cantext of the e+ntire praject in ' mind. Appiications far additional GRFA would require that 100% of the dwelling unit owners carastruct the additions simultaneously. Further, to ensure that the design of the project was developed with the entire project in mind, stafF was directed to include within the ordinance a provision requiring that applicattions for additional GRFA be made by a aondominium association or other similar goveming body. Rccnrding to the Council, the purpase of the amertdments is to create consistency in the implernentatiQn of the additional GRFA reguiatinn regardless of the residential zone district ~ 2 , The Zoning Regulations define a"multi-family dweffiing" as ~ "A building cantaining #hree (3) ar more dwelling units, including tawnhauses, rowhouses, apartments, and condominiums, designed far, or used by three (3) or more families, each living as an independent housekeeping unit.,, I1l, STAFF FtECOMMENDATiON When discussing passible revisions to the GRFA regulations addressing the ; implementation of GRFA relative to multi-family dwefling units, staff wauid sugges# #hat the following critEria be cansidered by the Planndng and Environmental Commission priar #o recommending an amendment ta the Town Gaunci(: 1. Effectiveness of #he regulation 2. Apprapriateness af the regulation 3. Enforceabifity of the regulation 4. Easy of implementa#ion 5. Cansistency of the regulation relative to other similar regulations 6. Impact to architectural quality. ~ Staff utilized the above-described criteria in evaluating the proposed zoning regulation text amendments. The cbnclusiQn 4f the staff after evaluating the proposed amendments is that the proposed changes to Section 12-15-4 {interior conversions} wiil result in an appropriate reguiation of GRFA in muiti-family structUres fhat is both easiiy enforced and implemented, and crea#es consistency in the implementation of GRFA among aSi residentiai zone districts. Staff believes that the proposed changes to Section 12-15-4 wi{i not have any significant negative impacts on the architectural quality of multii-fam+ly structures. in fact, in some instances, we believe fihat the changes wifl tesuit in improvetl architectural quality. The conclusion of the staff after evaluatir?g the proposed amendmen#s ta Seetion 12-15- 5 is that the prapased changes will result in a regulation that is effective at creating consistency among residential zone districts, but is nei#her effective, nar useful to the owners of multi-farni{y dwelling units. We belfeve that the proposed changes will be very difficult ta implement and create enfarcement problems. However, stafF does believe that the proposed changes, if they are able to be implemented, will have pasitive impacts an architectural quality since all of the additional GRFA wauld be added with the context of the entire structure in mind. Staff would recommend that anather alternative to the proposed text amendments to Section 12-15-5 {additiona4 GRFA} be considered. Staff wauld recnmmend that the additianai GRFA be implemented far multi-#amily structures neariy the same way it is implemented for single-family and two-family structures, Individual dwelling unit owners ~ within multi-family structures should be allowed to apply to utilize additional GRFA far exterior additions independent of the entire structure appiying and utilizing the additional 3 GRFA. Language could be added to the regu4atians addressing design anci architectura{ ~ compafibility requirements. The requirements wauld be intended to in5ure that scale, . propartion, design, treatment, character, context, colnrs, etc. are considered in the review process. It would be equally impartant ta note in the revised language that architectural compatibility and the cumulative efFecfs of exterior additions cauld be causes for denial of an application far additiarial GRFA. As stated in the purpose statement of the Additiona( GRFA (250 Urdinance), in part, "This section does not assure each single-family or two-famiiy dwelling located. within the Town of "Vail an additionai 250 square feet of CRFA." , - The availabifity of the additianal GRFA is cc3nditioned upon the application conforming to . certain requirements. The same couid hoRd true #oc multi-#amily structures and the dweiGng units within. Staff believes the proposed altemative to the prnposed text amendments will result in a change to #he additional GRFA regulations that, in effect, ailaws property awners to upgrade their properties, is apprapriate in terms af a{lowing exterior additions when the additions will have na negative impacts, is easily implemen#ed by thestaff, creates consistency amang afil the residential zone districts and dwelling unit types in Town and vstil} have no negative impacfis on fihe architec#uraf quality of the existing muiti-family structures. An important distinctidn af the proposed altemative is tha# staff stron9lY be4ieves that a regulation that is easily implemented, Gke the interior conversian fiar example, `ss easi{y processed and reviewed which resu9ts, we believe, in improved customer service and satisfaetion. ~ ~ 4 . ~ 12-15-3 1 2-15-4 ~ Building Code from the 1eve1 12-15-4: INTERI+UR CONVERSIONS: below (6 square foot apening maximum); A. Purpose: The interior conversion sec- tion of this Chapter provides far flexi- (3) The attic space shail ot bility and la#itude with #he use o# inte- have a sfructurai floor c~pa e af rior spaces within existingdwe1[1ng supparting a'4ive laad" eater units that meet or exceed the allow- than forty (40) pou s per able gross residential floar area _ square foot, arrd the ~ioor° of (GRFA). This would be achieved by_ the attic space can t not be allowing for the conversion of existing improved with decki ; interior spaces such as vau(ted spac- ' es, crawl spaces, and other in#erior (4) ft must be monstrated by spaces into fioor area provided the the architect t t a"truss-type" bulk and mass of the building is nat or similar str tural system can- increased. This provision is in#ended nat be utitiz as defined in the to accommodate existing homes definition o RFA; and where residents desire to expand the amount af usable space in the interior {5} lt w` be necessary that a of a hame. The Town has also recog- structu 1 element (i.e., coilar-tie) nized that property owners have con- be uti ed when rafters are used s#ructed in#erior space withaut bui(ding for t racsf system, (n an unusu- permi#s. This provisian is also intend- al i#uation, such as when a ed to reduce the occurrence af interiar be ring ridge system is used, building activity without buiiding per- ~ t staff will review the space for mits and thereby #urther pratecting the mpliance with this policy. heaith, safety, and welfare of the ' community. 8. imary/Secondary Units: B. Applicability: Single-family, fwo-famiiy, . The four hundred twen#y five and primarylsecondary type dweliing 25) square faot credit per unit shall units that exceed allowable GRFA will e applied #o eaeh unit after the sixty/ be eligible to make interior conver- orty (8.0f40) split has been calculated sions provided the following criteria (i.e., the seaondary unit shall belimit- are satisfied: ed to 40 percent of the total GRFA plus 425 square feet). 1. Any existing singie-#amily dwelling unit or any exist~ingdwelling unit within b. On prirnarylsecondary and a structure cnntaining no more than two-family lats, GRFA is calculated twa (2) dwelling units (exclusive of based on the entire lot. (C?rd, 73(1997) 1, employee hausing units" as defined §3) in the Zoning Code) shallbe eligible to add GRFA, via #he "interior space -onversion" pro vision inexcess of existing ar ailowable GRFA including such units lacated in a speciai devel- oprnent district, provaded, that such~ . Town of Vail ' ~ 12-15-4 12-15-4 ~ GRFA complies with the standards existing bui(ding, and the conversion ~ outlined herein. of o#her existing interior spaces such . as storage areas to GRFA. " 2. Far the purpose of tnis >ection, ' °existing unit" shail mean any dwelling 3. Proposais for GRFA pursuarst to unlt w4thin a structure containing na this Section may involve exterior mQd- more than tuvo (2) dwe!ling units (ex- ifications to existing buildings, howev- clusive of "employee housing un4#s" as er>. such modifications shall not in- defined in Sectian 12-2-2 of this Title) crease the ~ building bulk and mass of that has been constructed prior to the existing btii4ding. Exampies of August 5, 1997 and has received a exteriar modifications which are con- certificate of occupancy, or has been sidered #o inccease building bulk and issued a building permit prior to Au- mass inciude, but _are not limited ta, gust 5, 1997 or has received final #he expansion of any existing exterior Design Review Baard approval prior to walls of #he bui4ding, regrading araund August 5, 1997. a building in a manner which exposes rnare than two (2) ver#ical feet of ex- 3. 11t9ulti-family dwelling units are not isting exterior walls and the expansion eiigible to add GRFA pursuant #o this of existing roofs. Notwithstanding ths Section. two (2) verticak feet iimitatian #o re- grading around a building described C. Standards: above, additionai regrading may be permitted in order to aUow for egress 1. Na applicatitan to add floar area from new in#erior spaces. The exteni pursuant to this Section shall be made of such regradtng shall !ae iimited to ~ ur?til such time as ali the a1lowabie providing adequate egress areas for GRFA has been constructed fln the windows or daors as per the minimum preaperty, or an application is presently necessary requirement far the Uniform pending in conjunction with the app(i- 6ui{ding Gade. Exampfes of exterior cation to add ffoar area thafi utilizes ail modifica#ions which are not consid- allowable GRFA fior the proper#y. ered to increase building bu{k and rnass include, but are not limited ta, 2. Applications to add floor area pur- the addition o# windoarvs, doars, s(cy- suant to this 5ection shall be con- lights, and window-wells. Subject ta structed utilizing the flaor area oc design apprcival, dormers may be voturne of the building that is in exis- considered an exterior modification in tence prior ta August 5, 1997. New conjunction wi#h interior conversions s#ructures ur exteriar at#ditians to permitted by this Sectian. Prior to existing structures built after the effec- approvai of proposed darme.rs or re- tive date hereaf will not be eligible far grading for windows or doors as cie- interior cnnversions. Examples of how scribed abave, the sta#f or the Design ffaor area can be increased under the Review Bnard shall find that they do provision of this S-`;on include the not add significantly to the bulk artd canversion of existing basement ar mass of the building and are compatr- ~rmh,l spa~ec! to GRFA, the arirq,fican of tle with overa"; proportlori, 4o#ts within the buiiding volume of the and design of the building. Fvr fhe . ~ , Town of Vail . i R 12-16-4 12-1 5-4 ~ purpose of this Section, "dormers" are tive length of the dormer(s)does no# defined as a vertical window project- exceed fifty percent (50°!a) of the ing from a siaping raof o# a building, length of the sloping roo#, per roof having ver#ical sides and a gable or piane, fram which the dormer(s) . pro- shed roof, in which the tatal cumula- jec#s. t..ettigth of roof planu ° Lengitt of dorniar , ° ' ;_y,• ~~~~f ~r~,, ~ • , ' r L._... _ . _ _ J k I,;f CumalatNa Laripth of tlbtmet(e) may nat axceod 50% of'the tangth at tha voof planc. ~ 4. Propasais for the utilization of inte- to this Section shail aiso be aliowed rior conversion GRFA pursuant to this without amending the GRFA ;provi- Section shall comply with al! Town sions of the SC7D. However, properties zoning standards and appiicable de- with GRFA restrictions recarded on velopment standards. the plat for the develapment shall be LL regulated acccard'rng ta the plat restric- 5. Floor area within a garage that was tions unless the plat is mcadified to originally approved through the garage remcave such restrictions. fihe plan- space credit may not be converted to ning staff will review the appiication fia GRFA pursuant to fihis Section, ensure the proposed addition com- plies with a!I provisions of the interior D. Process: Applicatians shall be made conversion seetian. Submittals sha{1 to thp- Qepartment of Community De- inciude: velopment sta#f on forms provided by the Department. Applications for in#e- 1. Applicatinn fees pursuan# #a the rior conversions to single-family, current fee schedule. tvrro-family, and primarytsecondary , a••LS rl~i€.~~~1Cl~i Utllt°u lO{>`t"~t~'U !(1 a_, _..;cl1 C. ItlfC°'•,',a+i~1t't r'~Flrl nlr~n.~i '~'u 5~,'t fOI't~t development district (5DD) pursuant andrequired by subsecfion 12-11-4C Town of V"azl " . J I C` 15"fi I+G` f5'5 of this Titie or as determined by the (5) years by permitting the addition of ~ Department of Community Develop- up to two hundred fifty (250) square merit staff. Applicants would need to feet of grass residential floor area submit as-buGft filoor plans of the struc- (GRFA) #o such dwelling units, provid- ture so tliat staff can identi#y the exist- ed the criteria set forth in this Sectian ing buiiding from any new additions are met. `I"his Section does not assure that have occurred after the approval each single-family or twa-famiiy dweil- of this Chapter. ing unit bcated within the Town an additional two hundred fifty (250) . 3. Praposals deemed by the C}epart- square #eet, and proposals for anyment o# CommunityDeveiopment staf# additidns hereunder shallbe reviewed to be in compliance rrvith this Section ciose{y with respeCt to site plannirrg, and all applicable 2aning and develop- impact on adjacent properties, and ment regulaticins shall be apprnved by appiicable Town development stan- the Department of Community Devel- dards. The twa hundreti fifty (250) apmen# or shafi be fonrvarded ta the square feet of additional gross resi- Des4gn Review Board in accordance dential fioor area may be granted,to with Title 12, Chapter 11 of th9s Title. existing single-fiamily dwellings, exist-, Praposals deemed to not camply with ing two-family and existing multi-fami-~ #his Section or applicabie zanirag and ly dwe{{ing UYiit5 OIlIy bilCei but may. , development regulations shall be be reques#ed and granted in rriore, eienied. than one rncrement of iess than twa hundred fifty (250) square feet. Up- 4. llpon receiving approvals pursuant grading of an existing dwelling unit to this Secti+an, appiicants shall pro- under this Sectian shall include addi- ~ ceed with securing a buctding permifi tions thereto ar renovations thereof, prior tcs initiating construction of the but a demolrebuiid shall not be inelud- project. ed as being eligible for additidnal gPOSS i`E:S)df'.Tltla) fI00C c1Cea. 5. Any decisions of the Department of Community Devefopment pursuant to B. Sing1e-Family Dwellings And Two- this Section may be appealedby any Famiiy Dwe{lings: A sIng(e-family aor appCicant in accordance with the provi- two-fiamily dwefiing ur?i~y t~hai{ be eligi- sians of Section 12-3-3 of this Title. ble for additianal ss residentia( (Ord. 13(1997) § 3) floor area (GRF14) not to exceed a maximum of two hundred fifty (250) square feet of GRFA in addition ta the 12-15-5: ADDITIONAL GRt,1SS RESI- existing or ailowable GRFA for the. DENTIAL FLCfUR AREA (254 site. Before such additional CRFA can ORDINANCE): be granted, the single-#amily or two-family dwelling unit shal{ meet the A. Purpose: The purpose of this Section following criteria: is to provide an induceniemi for the upgrading of existing dweifing units 1, Eligible Time Frame: A single-fami- which have wo: ^ in existcnce wit7>;,, ly or tv,,c unit shall be the Town far a period of at least five eligible for additional GRFA, pursuant ~ , Town of Vizil - , ~ 12-15-5 'P 2-16-5 ~ to this Sectian, if it is in existence 4. Garage Conversions. If. any propos- prior tp November 30, 1995, or a com- al provides for tfie conversian of a pleted Design Review Baard appiica- garage ar enclosed parking area ta tion for the original construction of GRFA, such conversion will not be said unit has been accepted by the . allowed unless: a) either the conver- Department of Community Clevelop- sion wi{I no# reduce the number a# ment by November 30, 1995, ln addi- enciosed parking spaces below the tian, at least fiue (5) years must have number required •by this Code; or b) passed from the date the single-family provision is made fior creation af such . dwelling or two-family dwelling unit additional enclosed parking spaces as was issued a certificate of caccupancy may be required #or the new #o#al ' (whether temparary or final) ar, in the GRFA under this Cade. Pians for a event a certifica#e of accupancy was new garage or enclosed parking area, nat required for use of the dwel(ing at if required, shall accampany the appli- the time of comptetion, from the date cation under #his Section, andshal{benf origina( campletion and occupancy cans#ructed concurrently with the of the dwel{ing. conversion. 2. Use C?f Additional Floor 5pace: 5, Parking: Any increase in parking Proposals for the utilization of the requiremen#s as set forth in Chap#er additional gross residential fioor area 10 afi this Title due to any GRFA addi- (GRFA) under this provisian shall tion pursuarlt to this Section shall be comply with all Town zoning requirs- mat by the applicant. ments and applicable development ~ standards. If a variance is required far 6. Gonfarmity With Guidelines: All a proposai, it shall be approved by the proposals under #his Section shall be Planning and Environmenta{ Cornmis- required to confarm to the design sion pursuant to Chapter 17 of this review guidelines set forth in Ghapter Title before an application is made in 11 of this Title. A single-family or accardance with this Section. The two-family dwelling unit for which an applicant must obtain a building per- addition is proposed shall be required mit wi#hin one year of final Planning to meet the minimum Town fandscap- and Environmental Commission ap- ing standards as set forth in Chap#er proval or the approval for additional 11 of this Titfe. Before any additional GRFA shall be voiaed. GRFA may be permitted in accor- - dance with this Section, the s#affi shall 3. Notificatian: Adjaeent property own- review the maintenanee and upkeep ers and owners of dwelling units on af the existing single-family or the same lot shall be nnfii#ied of any twa-family dwelling and site, including application under this Section that landscaping, to determine whether involves any ex#ernal alterations to an they comply with the design review existing structure. Notification proce- guidellnes. No temporary certificate of dures shall be as outlined in subsec- occupancy shall ;a fcrr any tion 12-3-6C of fihis Ti#le. expansian of GRFA pursuant to this odciion until all required imprc,.,n_ ~ • Town of U¢il ~ - , * 12-15-5 1 2-15-5 manis to the site and structure have far additiona4 GRFA, pursuant to this ~ been completed as required. Sectian, if it is in exis#ence prior to November 30, 1995, or a eompleted 7. Appficabili#y: No pooling of gross Design Review Board application for . residential floor area shall be allowed _ the originaf constructian of said unit in single-family or twa-famiiy dweliing has been accep#ed by the Department units. No application for additional ofi Communi#y Develapment by No- GRFA shall request more thari two , verr5ber 30, 1995. In addition, at ieast hundred fifity (254) square . feet of five {5} ,years must have passed #ram s resi en#4al_ #laor area per , fihe date the building was issued a - single-famiiy dwe34irig-,,or two-#amily certificate of occupancy(whether dwettt?1`gj, nor shall any applicataran be temporary or final), ar, in the event a made additionaC GRFA untilsuch certi#icate o# occupancy uvas not re- time as all the ailowable GRFA has quired for use of the bui(ding at the been constructed on the propert y, or time of completion, from the date of an app{ication is presently periding in originai compietian and occupancy af con}unc#ion with ths application for the build?ng. additiona( GRFA that utiiizes a!1 al)ow- able GRFA far the property. 2. tlse Of Additional Floor Space: Proposa{s for the uti3ization nf the 8. One Time Crant: Any single-family additional GRFA under this provision ar two-family dwelling unit which has shall comply wi#h al4 Town zoning previausly been granted additional reguirements and app(icable develap_ GRFA pursuanf to #his Section and is ment standards. If a variance is re- demolrebuild, shall be rebuilt without quired for a praposal, it shall be ap- ~ the additional GRFA as previousiy proved by the Planning and Environ- appraved. mental Camrnissian pursuant to Chap- ter 17 of this 7itle before an appiica- 9. Demo/Rebuild Not Eligible; Any tion is made in accordance with this single-fami(y or two-fami(y dwelling Section. The appiicant must obtain a unit which is to be demofrebuild shall building perrxiit within one year afi finai not be eligible far additional GRFA. Planning and EnvironmentaR Commis- siara approval or the approval for addi- C. Mulfii-Famiiy dwelfings: Any dweiling tionai GRFA shall be vaided. 'urrit in a multi-family structure shall be eligible fnr additional gross residential 3. Parking Area Conversions: Partions floor area (CRfiA) not to exceed a of existing enelosed parking areas maximum of two hundred fi#ty (250) may be converted to GRFA under this square feet of GRFA in addition to the Sectian if there is no }oss o# existing existing or atlowable GRFA for the enclosed parking spaces in said en- site. Any app{icatian of such additiona( clased parking area. GRFA must meet the fbliowing crite- r?a: 4. Parking Requirements Observed: Any increase in parking requirements ~ r-ligible Tirne FPp--• A mi0tin(e- dua ',o --luit«,i, pursuant #o family dweVling unit shall be eligible ~ . ~ , Town of Vail ~ ~ ~ 12-15-5 i 2-1'S-5 ~ this Sec#ion shall be met by the appli- 7. Deck And BaIcony Enclosures: No cant. deck or balcony enclosures, vr any exteriar additions or aiterations to 5. Guideline Compliance, Review: Al1 multi-fiamiiy dwellings with the excep- proposals under this Sectian shall be . tion csf windows, skylights, or other reviewed for compliance with the de- similar madifications shall be allowed sign review guidelines as set forth in under #his Section. Chapter 11 0# this Title. Existing prop- - erties for which additional GRFA is 8. Appiicability: The pravisions of this proposed shall be reguired tn meet Section are applicable oniy to GRFA . minimum Town iandscaping standards addifions #o individual dwelling units. ' . as set forth in Chapter 11 of this Titfe. No pooling of GRFA shall be allowed Gsneral maintenance and upkeep of in mul#i-family dweliings. No applica- existing buildings and sites, including tion for additional GRfA shall request the muiti-family dwellings, landscaping mnre than two hundred fifty (250) or site improvements (i.e., trash facili- square feet of gross residential flaor ties, berming ta screen surface park- area per dweiling unit nor shall any ing, etc.) shall be reviewed by the application be made foc additional staff af#er the app(ication is made for GRFA until such time as ai( the a!lowY confarmance to said design review ab{e t`aRFA has been constructed on guidefines. This review shall take the properCy, place at the time a# the first applica- tian for additional CRFA in any 9. Nontransferabfe To Demo/Rebuild: multi-family dwelling. This review shall Any buiiding which has previously ~ not be required for any subsequent been granted additional GRFA pursu- . application for a period of five {5} ant to this 5ec#ion and is years from the date of the initial appli- demolrebuiid, shall be rebuilt wi#hout cation and review, but shall be re- the additional GRFA as previousiy quired for the first application fiied approved. after each subsequent five (5) year anniversary date of the initial review. 10. Demo/RebuiTd No# Eligible: Any No temporary certificate of accupancy multiple-family strttcture or dwelling shall be issue.d for any expansion o# unit which is to be demolrebuild shall GRFA pursuant to this Section unti1 all not be e(igible #or additional CRFA. required improvements to the multi-family dwelling site and building D. Procedure: have been completed as required. 1. Applieation; Content: Application 6, Condominium Associa#ian Approval: shall be made #o the Department of {f the praposed additian of GRFA is Community Development on forms for a dwelling unit located in a condo- pravided by the Departmen# af Com- rniriium project, a letter appraving munity Development and shall include: such addition from the condaminium assoeiation shall be required at the a. A fee pursuant to the curreii ti time the applica#ion is submi#ted. schedule shall be required with the applicat~..,.. ~ ~ Tvwn of Uail ' t ~ 12-15-5 12-15-5 b. Information and pians as set 4. Gomp4iance Required: 1# the De- ~ forth anri required by subsectian partment of Community Development 12-11-4C of #his Titie. staff determines that #he site for which additional GRFA is applied #or pursu- ` c. A fist of the names and address- : ant ta this Section dcaes not compiY es and stamped envelapes of a}1 the with minimum Town dandscaping or adjacent prcaperty owners and owners site standards as provided herein, the of dvsrelling units on the same lot as applicant will be requ€red tti bring the the ap{alicant. site into 'compliance wi#h such stan- dards befare any such tempcarary or _d. Any other applicable information permanerst certificate of oceupancy required by the Department af Com- will be issued for the additiona{ CRFA munity Devslopment to satis#y the added to the site, Befare any building criteria outiined in #his Section. permit is issued, the applicant shal[submit appropriafe plans and materi- 2. Hearing Set; Nofiice: Upon 'receipt als indicating haw the site will be ofi a compSeted appfication for addi- brough# into complianca with said #ionaE GRFA, the F'lanning and Envi- Town minimum standards, which ronmentai CommissiQn shall set a plans and materials shall be reviev+red date for a hearing in accordanca with by and approued by the [3epartment of subsection 12-3-68 of this Title. Nca- Community Development. tice shall be given, and the hearing shail be conducted in accordance with 5. Buiiding Permit; Upon receiving the subsections 12-3-6G and D of #his necessary approvals pursuant ta this Titfe. Section, the applicant shall proceed ~ with the seaurirtg of a building permit 3. Comp4iance Determined: if the prior to beginning the constructian of Department ofi Community aevelop- additianai CRFA. (Ord. 13(1997) § 3) ment staff determines that the site for which the application v4ras submittad is in compliance with fiown landscaping and site improvement standards, the applicant shall proceed as foliows: - a. Applicatian for GRFA additians which involve na change to the exteri- or of a structure shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Com- munity Development. b, Applications for GRFA additions invoiving exterior changes to a build- ing shall be reviewed and approved by the F'{anning and Environmental Cam- mission in accordance with the provi- sians of this Section. ~ . ~ # Town of Vail - 4VAIL TUWN Department of Community Develdpment • ~ 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Cotorado 81657 . . . ? • r r 970-479-2138 FAX 970-479-2452 TM TQ: Vail Townn Councif FRQM: CQmmunity Develapment DATE: October 13, 1998 SUBJEC7. Overview af Community Development projects Staff; Russ Forrest ~ I . Ptl1"p4S£ The purpose of this worksession is to obtain the Tawn Council°s input on projects that ,should be included in the 1999 & 2000 work-plan and budget for Community Development. Attached is a summary of projects that over the course of the {ast year either have been identified by Council, P{ar?ning and Environmental Commission, or staff far action. Most of the listed projects do not invaive additional resources outside of staff fiime. Several projects such as an ecor?omic devslapment ptan and cammunity #acilities plan wouid require consulting fees. Estimated costs are provided in the attached matrix where there may be consulting fees {see calumn projecttestimafied cast}. 2. ~~a'5'ing Capacity for Projects Please take an opportunity ta review the projects and determine what projects you feel should be addressed and which anes should not. For those actians #hat you feel shauld be included in the Community Development wark pEan, p(ease indicate whetker yoLt €eet ifi is a high, medium, or law pricarity. As a point of reference, Community Deve(opment can comfortably manage 2 major cammunity projects at a time (i.e., Common Ground, Lionshead). Each Senicar Planner can effectively handle 1 lang-range project a# a time (i.e. Aus#ria House,_GRF'A code revision) aiurag with a full case-load of development review prajects. We currentiy have 2 Senior Planners and a Chief of Pianninq. The ;:~rivironrnentai Hea~ti'l Speciaiist carr u~~~~~~ r~iai-iage 1-2 major projects at atime (Green 5tar Program, Waste Managernent). The Housing program is already relatively defined by the Common Ground pracess. However, the Cauncil's input an housing recommendations identified by the pubfic as part flf the recent common graund ~ discussions wauld be very helpful. - , RECYCLEDPAPER The a#tached list includes space to mark whether yau feei an actian is a priority fior action. At the Tuesday worksession, staff will briefly review each praject in a power point presentation. 5taff will then ask Council to identify high priority actions. 3. ReGOmmendations 4n September 28, 1998 the Planning and Environmen#al Cammission reviewed the C3epartment's project list and made recommendations an high priari#y actions. The high priority recommendations inciude: • Economic Development Plan + Gommunity Facility Siting • Revise EHU pnlicy and improve enfarcement • Review parking pay in (ieu policy • Continue impraving deveiopment process (Development Review Improvement Process) provide an intemet connection for applications • Codify staff interpretations • Improve water quality protectian standards (erosion confiral, stnrmwater management) • Complete Solid Waste Plan • Update Design Guidelines after Lionshead Master Plan is complete o Evaluafie cc>vering 1-70 and identify mitigation for interstate noise anti air quality impacts The Community C7evelapment sta€f fully supparts the Town Managers Budget, which ~ propases funding fior an economic development plan and a cammunity facility plan within the Planning Division, We feel these to be the most critical planning needs that nead funding at this time. The Manager's budget also funds the first tier actions for Camman Ground and the propased environmental projects. Staff aiso feels an evaluation of , performance building codes would be very useful #o imprave building safety and a11ow addifional creativity in design. FAeveryone\counci1l1 998\projects . ~ , ~ ~ Cammunity Development Projects Project/ Description Yes/No Priority. High, Estimated Cast Niedium, Low . .......~...r:: :.~r::.: ~ : : . . . . ................................:r.:::;...............:..:.. r..,,;...:..::r;..~.::,:_:r: Lionshead Impiement plan by amending zoning Redevetopment code to be consistent with the master plan, potential rezonings in Lionshead Study Area, and other code re(ated activities. Cantinue research an financial incentives such as creation af Downtown Development Authority and taking advantage of Tax (ncrement Financing, Design Guidelines Reworkloverhaul of the general design ($60,000) guideiines which ef#ect praperties Town wide. This has been budgeted far severai years and pushed back due to other Council prioriCies. Parking & 7he parking requirements in the core Parking Pay-in-lieu areas and in other areas of town may not ~ reffect the rea( needs. The current parking requirements are based upon urban area models which do not take inta accaunt mass transit, pedestrianization, and skiing. A complete analysis needs ta be performed to understand the true impacts of retaii area expansion, additian of hotel rooms, and other uses. This should a(so be included as a necessary activity #or implementation a# fihe Lionsnead Master rian. SDD process Develop a revised p,oWass for SDD I revisians praposais. Cnuncii has expressed concerns abaut how SDD projects are prncessed. it was identified that the Gouncii input is needed earlier in the process. The entire regulation needs to be reviewed to develop and consistent and reliable process. . . . : ~ . .:1.~"... ...............,..r....... ........r...........,::: DRiP-Standards compleiiu~ ~ w16 ddUoption Df-Air standards phase 1. This includes codification of the Standards Handbook reviewed by Cauncil 2 years ago. The ~ standards have been utilized over the last two years with great suecess. z 1 Community Devetopment Prajects ~ Projecti Description Yes/No Priority: High, Es#imated Cost Medium, Low DR1P-process Completion of DFtif' process. Revise and Phase 2 analyze the Building Permit proeess in order to create a pracess that is predictabie for developers. Land Exchange Based an the land exchange numerous Annexations & properties wiN nsed to be annexed or de- rezanings annexed, zoned, and platted. Prioriry is Rackledge Rd. and Ptarmigan Rd. .};.v}i+'.:'•::yiivv:.::v.v.::~.,;•:,•.::.1:i:r::tii;.~:i.Y:.~:::~i-~XC~~:i.:i?i ~..:~..n........, s~.n... }i;;ji~.:::~.. :%iii'±i'~i:v'i~.iti:i~::::..,•~ .:.;v-.::v-•.:.~:: ;v :~.;i,:-::•.i:.ix::::.:::::.:}~._:::n::•::r:: ' t.Y..w::.~:... ..n..... Jr: ..n :.:r,v::: w : :w . :...t•:::.~.~...:.v;•:?:~n.:.~:._i........... . r:... :•.s:~::: ..e ..i..i.~..~..z........~. ~.:fh•:.•.:L-.•....•.•..~y.t.................. r . „ . ?:~:4'::..0.•.+w.w. •.v::N:•v:.:•:i'?:ii~.. :R;;;:;.i;.:•:i{,ixti~i<'i:::•:Y•;i.'•:~ :::.:.~e.,,•,.p::tt::•::•::::.p::~:h>:~:::::::•.:_ :va.~.:::: :r:..:.~....::.•.~::: ;::a::.:::t•::;:~::;a.;,:~ ~ • 3 : ; ; ' ' ~ ~ ~ : ~ C; # ; : : ; ; :::.~::v31:::?¢:;C<d:::?.e:~::::;:~:.:::~:i:'r>:25:•::~x;:v:•;i.>.i.•.:::: :.:v::: ':::?:t>:::'•4:',:r5':>:: S:Fi>~;:;if^:`: $':~sS#~::'r` ~:::?3.... .....~~.j •:.;~n :.:xa ::::.........~......n..... ~ ,:.>tt>h•::..-,•........;.:oev.:.:~::.:~:Y.~.~::.X•::v.:{'.;.::::; ::~,:.~::.~,•.:~:..:~.f v:, ........,...,.n. Y:~Y~?i:~%i ....:::;x.~ei=.?:::.}::•:~:~:~?.:.:.; ,f ~ :n ..::.:::..:::..::.v:m:::.~.~:.:~.:~::..,:::} „~.v:::ii:ts:::.~::i},.,i:~i..:......... . . ...::.:,.,~.ti•:•.:.,•.•.~:iyy:::::.v.,:n.:::} . . W~SZ:..:.: ~.:.r. •...................a............ . .........::.e. R"T.,,,,.:...;... . . .;;~:.y,<:,,,:.,?»}a;';'>s'.•,;;>,..;.,:::;:;.<`:> Y';:;: ~ :::.:::::::::i GRFA-Phase 2 Application of GRFA interior conversions Muttipte Family and 250 ordinance to multiple f~mily projects. Three Mile P(an bevelop a three-mile plan per State ($40,000-$80,000) Statute for the Vail area. This would allow Vail to have more contrnl over aetivities within 3 miles af the baundary, including, potentially, Vail Mtn. Community Facility `fihrough the Common Grbund process, ~ Needs Assessment the community identffied the RV parking ($40, 000 - Currently area and the Golf Course Club house as Budgefed) possible sites for commurrity facilities. As a next step a planning process needs to be initiated to determine community facility needs Commerciai Vitality Working with community business & interests develop and imptement an ~ Ecannrrtic economic develapment plan. The Development Community Task farce has discussPd inviting the Urban Land Institute ta help ~ !?-~urrently `~ith an economic develor~ment plan, Budge#ed) -aiici tlse Ptan The Land Use Pian was adapted in 19867 ~ 7his plan contains many policies which (,b5(J,000475,000) tl12 ZOi"fti`ry Rttguiatau1 10 ldt~~ ~u~~ . , reviewing development projects. These ~ policies may or may not refiect current thinking by the Town GounciL Additionaily, the Land Use Map identifies ~ areas inconsistently wfth the current zaning (i.e., the Valley is shQwn as a!I o en s ace . The lan naeds to be . , 2 4 ~ Community Devefopment Projects Project/. aescription 1feslNo Priori#y: High, Estimated Casfi Medium, Law updated ta reflact current conditions. 011101- ;%:..:,r ~i,•'%• f !.~f~` ~ / r !i l! / /f ~f ~ f ~~~~~~~~~//•i . . l ~ , l.l~~~/%! Ski 5tarage Define commercial ski sCorage and Definitians basement area in order to clarify regulation. Sign Gode We have campleted phase 1 af the sign Phase 2 code revision. We committed ko Councii to overhaul this section. Includes potential revisions for West Vail businesses that have received variances over the years for signs. Revision wouid place code in matrix form. Staff Reduce the number of these by Interpre#ations codification or elimination. Notebook ~ Code Enforcement Numerous violations are occurring with respect to construction without building permits or DRB approval, signs, parking and vehicle storage, dumpsters, etc. There is a need ta ba an angoing commftment to en#arcing the Zoning and Sign Codes. Community Development and the Police CJepartment are planning increased enforcement activity using code enforcement affiieers. . :,...,:::..,...;.;:,r....... ~ Water Quality Gouncil requested staff to review Program ($10s000- standards for erosian controi, storm currentlybudgeted) waCer management, and stream setbacks. ln additian, the Town has had ~ al-I dctive partnership with the Water District and VA to monitor water quality ~biOlflCjiGal (lediCif vi iavjc u,E,-'E'k. Tree Ordinance As part of F'athw;ivS to Performnnne, - bev staff identified becoming dLruc city USA as an important action. Next step would be to determine i# Cauncil is interesCed. PEC and DRB are interested ~ in developing better standards for tree ~ protection. , 3 x # Cammunity Develapment Projects ~ Projecti Description Yes/Ncr Priority; High, Estimated Cast Medium, Low This is an angaing environmentaf Green Star certification program that has been very Program weli received in the Town. ($8, D00-currently budgeted) Solid iNasfe plan This is a project that is 90°tp complete, ($S,OlJO-currenfly which was not completed due to the budgeted) vacancy in the Senior Environmental Planning positian. Building PerFarmance Evaluate implementation of performance Building Cades building codes as a means ofi clarifying the intent of our existing codes. This would provide greater design fiexibility for new ~ buildings and provide additional incentive for older buildings to improve building safety. . ~ a 4 Project Description Yes/No Priority: High, MedIUf'C1, L4w HOUSING PROJEGT5 Mausing Needs 1he assessmen# will Assessment be done countywide, inconjunction with $7,000 other jurisdictions and large employers. it wiil provide updated information on the need for and suppiy ofi affordable housing in the count . Evaluation of The community has existing affordabie asked for a detailed housing analysis of existing developments developments to understand how effective they have been in addressing the housin rablem. Revise Employee Update the current Housing Ordinance ardinance ta address current housing needslsalutions, changes in palicies, ~ nanconforming uses, as weli as an empioyee hcausing zone district. The community has asked that the Town identifiies and eliminates current regulations that discourage the private sector from creating housin solutions. Buy Downs Develap criteria and r then implement program ta acquire existing units in Town and restrict them as empioyee housing with the prics a reciation ca s. invoive the business With speeific seasonai ( ~ community housing praposa4s, I UtG (UVY{1 VViAt ~...v.. the bUSItIBSS community for cost sharin . ~ , ~ . Consolidated Create marketing ~ housing information packet ta inform source public of the many programs and developments that have been created ta address the housing problem throughout the count . Enforcement Step up the en#arcement effarts af the Town for #he units that allow Empioyee Require developers to Generation pravide housing units or a fee in-lieu of housing units for new commercial develo ment. RETfi Tax Eliminate Real Esta#e Transfer Tax #ar first time, local hamebuyers. RETT is anly waived for deed restricted units. Vail Racquet Club Consider acquisition ~ ofi existing employee housing units under deed res#ric#ions, which expire in the near fiuture. Caretaker Consider requiring apartmenis new residentiai canstruction exceeding 3,500 square feet per unit to include a caretaker un it. Incent homeowners Create pilo# projects to increase the which "reward" locals seasonal bed who open up existing housing supply homeslbedraoms to seasonai em lo ees. Dedicated Open Take Space recommendations from Common Ground re(ating to dedicated open throug~. the a rova! rocess. ~ a 4VAIL Tou ~~v Departrrtent of Cammunity Development ~ • ~ . 75 South Frontage Road Vail, Cotorado 81657 970-479-2138 • • • . . . FAX 970-479-2452 TM TO: Vail Town Council & Plannirtg and Envtronmental Commiss'ton FROM: Gommunity Development DATE: Qctober 13, 1998 SUBJECT. Review Eacpectations for SDDs and Master Plans Staff: Russ Forrest The VaiC Town Council and the Pianning and Environmental Cammission are invited to Michael's American Bistro for iunch at 12:00 to 1:30 0n Tuesday Uctober13th to discuss expectatians for reviewing the Linnshead Ma$ter Plan and future SDDs. The purpose of ~ the informal discussion is to improve the Councils and Commissions expectations afi each other's roles when reviewing master plans and special developmen# district proposa(s. Suggested discussion topics inctude. • Council review their expectatiorrs of #he Commission's role in reviewing Master Plans and SDDs. * PEC review their expectations for how the Town Counci( wifl u#ilize PEC recommendations. • Discuss haw joint work sessions shou~ld be conducted • Discuss whether there should be a 7awn Cauncil member participating in PEC worksessions for master plans or critical SDDs to improve cnmmunication between the two boards. - » Discuss whether a PEC member should be present when PEC recomrraendations on master plans ar SDDs are discussed with #he Town Council. F;everyonelruss\memo\eoupec ~ D RECYCLEI7 PAPEh' » s ° . . I PLANNiNG AND ENVIRQNMENTAL COMMISSlON'~ Uctober 12, 199$ k-~ Minutes MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Greg IVIbfFet Russefl Forrest John Schofield Jeff Hunt Galen Aasland ` Dominic Maurieila Diane Go(den (Ieft at 2:20p.m,) Judy Rodriguez Ar?n Bishop Tom Weber Brian Doyon F'ublic Hearang 2.00 p.m, Greg Maffet caNed the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. 1. A request tor additional GRFA, utiGzing the 250 ordinanee, to allow for a residential addition, located at 1522 Buffehr Creek Rd. l The Valley Condos #A-26. Applicant: Sherman Milier, represented by Barbara Duncan & Mike Perkin Planner: Jeff Hunt ~ Jeff HLint gave an overview of fihe staff inerno. Greg Moffet stated, for the recard, that np applicant or pubiic were present. Greg Maffet asked for the Commissicaner's comments, They had na comments. John Schofield made a rnotian for appraval, with amending the ccanditiors to read 'wifihin 6' from any existing str~~ture, " iri accor~ance with the staff memo. Diane Goiden seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vate ot 7-0. 2. A final review of proposed text amendments to the Town of Vail Zaning Regulatinns addressing the regulation of Gross Residen#ia) Flaar Area (GRFA) in the Multi-Family Zone Districts. Applican#: Town af Vail Pianner: George RutheriDaminic Mauriello 1 ~ Planning and Environmental Commissian Minutes fJctober 12, 1998 Dominic Mauriello gave an averview pf the stafF memo and stated that staff was attempting to ~ create a regulation which would nat overburden applicants with restrictions and regulatians that, in fact, would be used. Greg Moffet stated that the PEC would first discuss the Interior Conversian section. He then said he saw an issue with parkirrg on multiple family devalopments and that if an expansion created a need for additional parking, it may be difficult to provide. Daminic Mauriello explained the parking reguirements were based on square footages. Greg Maffet stated for the record that no public came forward to speak. John Schofield asked what the intent of administration would be. Dominic Mauriello said it would be the same as what was being done today. Greg Mofifet asked if there would be amnesty for existing illegal interior conversions. Dominic Mauriello said, yes. John Schofield asked about any cnmmon area. Dominic Maurie(lo said a fetter would be required from the Condo Association far any interior conversion per existing cade requirements and that cammon area ccauld be utilizeri as lang as it is interior. ~ John Schofield made a motion to recommend approval of the changes to allow multi-#amify interior conversions. 8rian Doyon seconded the motian. The motion paSsed by a vote of 7-0. Qiane Colden left at 2:20 p.m. Daminic-Mauriello gave an overview of the 250 section far exterior additions for multi-family units. Greg Moffet asked far any public comment. There was no public comment. Tom Weber said he was not sure the 250 sq. ft, additional GRFA for exterior expansions was appropriate for multi-fiamily prajec#s, as he was not sure this wauld work any better if people were to come in with separate applicatians. He said the first applicant should be the Association and the Association should be responsible for guideline campiiance and organizing their tenants, whieh uvould make it almast impassible ta get anything done. He saici if we were trying to incerttivize 2 Pfanning and Environmenta! Commission Minutes October 12, 1998 ~ ~ decent impravements, the 250 was nat the best way to get there, since the Assaciation was responsible fiQr pulling everyth;ng together. Brian Doyan said it was scary to give the 250's to a large camplex, since there was oNy so much room and he was crancerned abocrt density. He said there would be no gain for the individual unit if it was located in the middie caf the building. Fle said the Association would need a rrtaster plan and sequencing to accompiish this. He thought that postage stamping new additions on o1d buildings would look hodge podge an a bui(ding. He also said with a large building, it wou(dn't work out with each individual owner and #his was nat about keeping up with the code. He said we wauld see nothing, if it went to the association. Dominic lVfaurielfo said new square footage would work within the existing density, with no additional units. Brian Dayon said the 254 was not designed for muftiple family developments and would nat have the same benefits as fnr a single family. aominic Mauriello said that Council iooked at this with fihe Association caming in as the applicant, and that it needed to get all buiit together as one product. John Schofield said he remembered from a past memo, fhat this would add 1.3 mi]lion additional square feet to the Town of Vail. Ne said Council would need that ntamber. He said it was scary, as it would be tao much square footage out there. He said a blanket 250 to a 300 sq. ft studio being treated the same as to a 6,000 square foot unit didn't make sense. He said a percentage needed ~ to be given based on square footage instead of a flat 250. He also agreed #o have 100°l0 of the Association would nat work. He said fram a practicai standpaint, this would not work, but from an architectural standpoint, it made sense. Galen Aasfand said the basis was to bring fairness to zaning. He said patkingwould be hugely affected with fihe iarger parcels and #he way it was written, it was not starfing from an equai situation. Ann Bishop said this was a complex i~~ue and it would be very ciifficu1t to gei the cc~ndo cswnership to agree, but there needed to be consistency with starting oufi frorn the same playing field. Ann said that additions should be on a r,,ase-by-case basis. She stated we must encourage people to renovate, sa perhaps we need more time to think this through. Greg Moffet said he would vote to recommend #o Council that zoniiig acrass aII districts is inherently unequat and this was not the right way to dcr i#. He said there were much more furtc#arnental issues needing s#aff time and he couldn't encourage any rnore wasted time on this issue. He said that if Gouncil was dead set for this, then the applica#ions should go directly to Council and not to staff, or the PEC, because it is a waste of time. He stated that rea{ incentives need to be develaped, if redeveloprrrent is the aim, utilizing many more too?s, Iske fhe Lionshead Master Pian. 3 Planning anci Environsrtental Commission ~ NPinutes October 9 2, 1 998 Tom Weber said we needed something to incent large projects and we needed something to direct ~ to associatians and that this nrdinance needed to address projects, not intiividual owners. Dominic Mauriello summarized that #he PEC wanted to see a camprenensive ordinanee addressing incentives for redevelopment of multi-family project and not a coakie cutter approach using the 250 ordinance. John Schofield made a motion to recommertd denial of the Council ar staff propQSals on amendrnents to the 254 ordinance to allow exterior conversions. Galen Aasland seconded the motion. The rnotion passed by a vote of 6-0. 3. A request for a rrvnrksession ta discuss, the establishment of a Speeial Development Distric#, to allow for a commercial expansion, Iocated at 680 W. Lionshead Place/ Lat 3, Block 1, Lionshead Third Filing. Appiicant: Antlers Condominium Association, represented by Robert LeVine Planner: Dominic Mauriello TAE3LED UNTIL. ACTQBER 26, 1998 John Schofieid made a motion to #able item #3. Galen Aasland seconded tlie motion. ~ The mntion passed by a vote of 6-0. 5. Information Update Tom Weber asked for a joint worksession with Council an the GRF'A sectic,n. Greg Moffet said he was apposed ta spending another minute on #his issue and suggested spending some time on neighborhoad parks or other importartt Tawn issues. 6. Approval of September 28, 1998 minutes, Greg Moffet had changes. Gaien Aasiand made a motion to approved the amended rninutes. Ann Bishop seconded the motian. 4 Pianning and Environmentai Commission Minutes ~ October 12, 1998 ~ The mation passed by a vcate af 6-0. Galen Aasland made a motion to adjaum. Brian Doyan seconded the mofiion. The motion passed by a vate of 6-0. The meeting adjoumed at 2:45 p.m. ~ ~ Planning and Environmental Commission ~ Minutes October 12, 199$