HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-0326 PECTHIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning
and Environments! Commission of the Town of
jo Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on March 26, 2001, at 2: 00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for variances from Section 12 -6D -6 (Setbacks) and Title 14 (Development Standards -
locating required parking in the Right -of -Way), to allow for a residential addition and remodel located
at 2956 Bellflower Dr. / Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Alan Peters, represented by Braun Associates
Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a modification to an existing conditional use permit to allow for the use of two
modular classroom units at Vail Mountain School, located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road 1 Lot 12,
Block 2, Vail Village 12' Filing_
Applicant: Vail Mountain School
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a variance from Section 12-6C -6 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for a proposed
addition in the rear setback, located at 5027 Ute Lane /Lot 31, Vail Meadows Filing 1.
Applicant: T. Larry & Renee Okubo
Planner: Brent Wilson
A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for a Type II EHU, located at 185 Forest
Road /Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Village 1 Filing.
49 Applicant: Oscar Tang
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
A request for a variance from Section 12 -7H -10 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for an proposed
addition in the rear setback, located at 660 West Lionshead Place /Lot 1, Vail Lionshead 1St
Filing, 1" Addition.
Applicant: Lions Square Condo Association
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a Type Il Employee Housing Unit, located at 1552 Matterhorn Circle /Lot 2, Timber
Vail Subdivision.
Applicant: Ranch Creek Development
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a variance from Section 12 -7D -5 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for the addition of
mechanical equipment within the required rear setback at the Brandess Building, located at
2077 N. Frontage Rd. /Lot 39A, Buffehr Creek Subdivision.
Applicant: Jayne Brandess Irrevocable Trust, represented by Abacus Communications
Planner: Allison Ochs
A final review of a request for a rezoning from Agriculture and Open Space to
Primary /Secondary Residential and a Minor Subdivision to create two residential lots and
a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for an amendment to the Vail Land
ek Use Plan changing the land use designation from Public/Semi- Public use to Low Density
Residential, located at 3160 Booth Falls Road /Part of Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12'"
Filing.
1 4VAID TOWN QF
Applicant: Boothfalls Homeowner's Association, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Russell Forrest
A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of Phase I of
Donovan Park improvements, generally located southeast of the intersection of Matterhorn
Circle and the South Frontage Road. 44
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a worksession to discuss a proposed special development district to allow for the
construction of a new conference facility /hotel; and a final review of conditional use ,permits to
allow for the construction of fractional fee units and Type III employee housing units at 13 Vail
Road I Lots A, B, C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 2.
Applicant: Doramar Hotels, represented by the Daymer Corporation
Planner: Brent Wilson
A request for a major amendment to Special Development District #4, to allow for the
conversion of an existing indoor tennis court to a spa, located at 1295 Westhaven
Drive /Cascade Village.
Applicant: L -O Vail Hotel. Inc.
Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a conditional use permit, to amend an existing conditional use permit, to allow for
one additional Fractional Fee Club unit, located at Vail Mountain Lodge, 352 E. Meadow
Drive /Part of Tract B, Vail Village 1 51 Filing.
Applicant: Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: George Ruther 0
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular
office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development
Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site
visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department.
Please call 479 -2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 -hour notification_ Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published March 9, 2001 in the Vail Trail,
E I
2
THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on March 26, 2001, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a zoning code text amendment to Section 12 -71-1-7, Exterior Alterations or
Modifications, to correct an error in the prescribed procedure for certain types of Design Review
applications for properties in the Lionshead Mixed -Use 1 Zone District.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during regular
office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community Development
Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation and the site
visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development Department.
Please call 479 -2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 -hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published March 10, 2001 in the Vail Daily.
0
•
1 *VAI&L TOWN
0
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Department of Community Development
TO 14 AN Of IL 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co,us
Project Name: Brandess Building CUP PEC Number: PECO10002
Project Description:
0
Participants:
Sprint PCS Wireless on top of Brandess Bldg.
OWNER BRANDESS, JAYNE
C/O BRIAN E. O'REILLY, ATiY
PO BOX 5780
AVON CO 81620
License:
APPLICANT GLEN KLOCKE
Abacus Communications
10876 Parker Vista Lane
Parker, CO 80138
License:
0110212001 Phone:
01/02/2001 Phone: 303-840-0407
Project Address: 2077 N FRONTAGE RD WEST VAIL Location:
40 Legal Description: Lot: 39 Block: Subdivision: BUFFER CREEK RESUB
Parcel Number: 210312302025
Comments:
BOARD /STAFF ACTION
Motion By: John Schofield
Second By: Brian doyon
Vote: 6 -0
Conditions:
Action: APPROVED
Date of Approval: 03/28/2001
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and /or the Design Review Board.
Cond: CON0004613
That the applicant is required to provide adequate provisions to screen the equipment
Entry: 03/28/2001 By: ao Action: AP Cond: CON0004614
That the applicant either reconfigure the equipment to comply with required setbacks
or receive a variance prior to final DRB approval
Entry: 03/28/2001 By: ao Action: DN variance denied
0 Planner: Allison Ochs
PEC Fee Paid: $200.00
0 0
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
• Department of Community Development
t V 4N OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Coiorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co.us
Project Name: Brandess Building Variance PEC Number: PECO10011
Project Description:
Participants:
rear setback variance for mechanical equipment
OWNER WEST VAIL ASSOCIATES LTD 02/26/2001 Phone:
2121 N FRONTAGE RD W 101
VAIL CO
81657
License:
APPLICANT JAYNE BRANDESS REVOCABLE TRUO2/26/2001 Phone:
PO Box 3011
Lihue, HA 96766
License:
Project Address: 2077 N FRONTAGE RD WEST VAIL Location: Brandess Building
0 Legal Description: Lot: Block: Subdivision: VAIL DAS SCHONE CONDO
Parcel Number: 210311416001
Comments: in accordance withstaff findings
BOARD /STAFF ACTION
Motion By: Brian doyon Action: DENIED
Second By: John Schofiels
Vote: 5 -0 Date of Approval:
Conditions:
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and /or the Design Review Board.
Planner: Allison Ochs
PEC Fee Paid: $250.00
is
•
0
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE
Monday, March 26, 2001
"&81/SA
PROJECT ORIENTATION I - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 11:00 am
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Chas Bernhardt
Site Visits : 12 :15 pm
1. Okubo residence — 5027 Ute Lane
2. Vail Mountain School — 3160 Katsos Ranch Road
3. Tang residence — 165 Forest Road
4, Cascade Hotel — 1295 Westhaven Drive
5. Peters residence — 2955 Bellflower Drive
6. Brandess Building — 2077 N. Frontage Road
Driver: Brent
1*
NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6 :00 - 6 :30 p.m.
Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers
2:00 pm
A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for a Type II Employee Housing Unit (EHU),
located at 185 Forest Road /Lct 26, Block 7, Vail Village 1 Filing,
Applicant: Oscar Tang, represented by Ray Nielsen, AIA
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
2_ A request for a Type II Employee Housing Unit, located at 1552 Matterhorn Circle /Lot 2,
Timber Vail Subdivision.
Applicant: Ranch Creek Development
Planner: Bill Gibson
3. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6C -6 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for a
proposed addition in the rear setback, located at 5027 Ute Lane /Lot 31, Vail Meadows Filing
1.
Applicant: T. Larry & Renee Okubo
Planner: Bill Gibson
I -I
4. A request for a variance from Section 12 -7D -5 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for the
addition of mechanical equipment within the required rear setback at the Brandess Building,
located at 2077 N. Frontage Rd. /Lot 39A, Buffehr Creek Subdivision.
Applicant: Jayne Brandess Irrevocable Trust, represented by Abacus Communications
Planner: Allison Ochs
!1
TO 6 F VA1LL �
5. A request for a modification to an existing conditional use permit to allow for the use of two
modular classroom units at Vail Mountain School. located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road / Lot
12, Block 2, Vail Village 12`" Filing. 0
Applicant: Vail Mountain School
Planner: Brent Wilson
6. A request for variances from Section 12 -6D -6 (Setbacks) and Title 14 (Development Standards -
locating required parking in the Right -of -Way), to allow for a residential addition and remodel
located at 2955 Bellflower Dr. / Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain,
Applicant: Alan Peters. represented by Braun Associates
Planner: Allison Ochs
7. A request for a conditional use permit, to amend an existing conditional use permit, to allow
for one additional Fractional Fee Club unit, located at Vail Mountain Lodge, 352 E. Meadow
Drive /Part of Tract B, Vail Village 1 Filing,
Applicant: Braun Associates, Inc,
Planner: George Ruther
8. A request for a recommendation to the Town Council on a zoning code text amendment to
Section 12 -7H -7, (Exterior Alterations or Modifications), to correct an error in the prescribed
procedure for certain types of Design Review applications for properties in the Lionshead
Mixed -Use 1 Zone District.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
9. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of Phase
I of Donovan Park improvements, generally located southeast of the intersection of
Matterhorn Circle and the South Frontage Road.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 9, 2001
10. A final review of a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for a rezoning from
Agriculture and Open Space to Primary /Secondary Residential and a Minor Subdivision to
create two residential lots and a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for an
amendment to the Vail Land Use Plan changing the land use designation from Public/Semi-
Public use to Low Density Residential, located at 3160 Booth Falls Road /Part of Lot 12,
Block 2, Vail Village 12 "' Filing.
Applicant: Boothfalls Homeowner's Association, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Russell Forrest
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 9, 2001
0
0
11. A request for a variance from Section 12 -7H -10 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for an
proposed addition in the rear setback, located at 660 West Lionshead Place /Lot 1 Vail
Lionshead 1 Filing, 1" Addition.
Applicant: Lions Square Condo Association
Planner: BIII Gibson
TABLED UNTIL APRIL. 23, 2001
12. A request for a worksession to discuss a proposed special development district to allow for
the construction of a new conference facility /hotel, and a final review of conditional use
permits to allow for the construction of fractional fee units and Type III employee housing
units at 13 Vail Road / Lots A, B, C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 2.
Applicant: Doramar Hotels, represented by the Daymer Corporation
Planner: Brent Wilson
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 23, 2001
is
•
l3. A request for a major amendment to Special Development District #4, to allow for the
conversion of an existing indoor tennis court to a spa, located at 1295 Westhaven
Drive /Cascade Village.
Applicant: L -0 Vail Hotel Inc.
Planner: Ailison Ochs
WITHDRAWN
14. Approval of March 12, 20101 minutes
15. Information Update
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planners office located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479 -2356, Telephone for the
Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published March 23, 2001 in the Vail Trail.
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS
•
•
Monday, March 26, 2001
PROJECT ORIENTATION 1 - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 11:00 am
MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT
Diane Golden Chas Bernhardt
Brian Doyon
John Schofield
Doug Cahill
Galena Aaslen
Site Visits : 12:15 pm
1. Okubo residence — 5027 Ute Lane
2. Vail Mountain School — 3160 Katsos Ranch Road
3. Tang residence — 185 Forest Road
4. Cascade Hotel — 1295 Westhaven Drive
5. Peters residence — 2955 Bellflower Drive
6. Brandess Building — 2077 N. Frontage Road
Driver: Brent
a* ,
7 ) 3
NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinDer from 6:410 - 6:30 p.m.
Public_ Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2 :00 pm
A request for variances from Section 12 -6D -6 (Setbacks) and Title 14 (Development Standards -
locating required parking in the Right -of -Way), to allow for a residential addition and remodel
located at 2955 Bellflower Dr. / Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Alan Peters, represented by Braun Associates
Planner: Allison Ochs
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Diane Golden VOTE: 5 -0
APPROVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS:
1. That prior to final design review approval, the applicant provides a landscape plan which
includes provisions to adequately buffer the surface parking area from adjacent
properties.
C]
2. That the applicant submit a revocable right -of -way permit for all improvements located
in the drainage easement and right -of -way prior to submittal of the building permit.
2. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for a Type II Employee Housing Unit (EHU),
located at 185 'Forest Road /Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Village I Filing.
Applicant: Oscar Tang, represented by Ray Nielsen, AIA
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 5 -0
*VAIRL TOWN
APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION:
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Community Development Department shall
receive proof from the applicant that a Type II Restrictive Covenant has been recorded
with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorders Office, thereby ensuring that the employee
housing unit will be permanently restricted for employee housing.
A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for a Type II Employee Housing Unit (EHU),
located at 1552 Matterhorn Circle /Lot 2, Timber Vail Subdivision.
Applicant: Ranch Creek Development
Planner: Bill Gibson
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Diane Golden VOTE: 5 -0
APPROVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS:
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a Type II EHU deed
restriction to the Town of Vail Department of Community Development. This document
shall be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office and will require that
the employee housing unit be permanently restricted for employee housing_
2. The Conditional Use Permit for the proposed EHU is contingent upon Design Review
approval.
4. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6C -6 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for a
proposed addition in the rear setback, located at 5027 Ute Lane /Lot 31, Vail Meadows Filing
1.
Applicant: T. Larry & Renee Okubo
Planner: Bill Gibson
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 5 -0
APPROVED WITH 2 CONDITIONS:
1. That the applicant submit a site- specific geological investigation, completed
by a professional geologist or registered professional engineer, to the Town
for review and approval prior to final Design Review approval.
2. That the proposed addition shall comply with Design Standards.
5. A request for a variance from Section 12 -70-5 of the Vail Town Code to allow for the
addition of mechanical equipment within the required rear setback at the Brandess Building,
located at 2077 N_ Frontage Rd. /Lot 39A, Buffehr Creek Subdivision.
Applicant: Jayne Brandess Irrevocable Trust represented by Abacus Communications
Planner: Allison Ochs
MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND: John Schofield VOTE: 5 -0
DENIED
6, A request for a modification to an existing conditional use permit to allow for the use of two
modular classroom units at Vail Mountain School, located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road / Lot
12, Block 2, Vail Village 12 Filing.
Applicant: Vail Mountain School
Planner: Brent Wilson
MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 4 -0 (Doyon recused)
APPROVED WITH 4 CONDITIONS:
2
1. That both modular classroom units will comply with all town design guidelines, be
painted to match the existing school building (beige base with brown trim) and that
additional landscaping for buffering will be added surrounding the new structure.
These issues are subject to review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review
Board.
2. If any revisions are proposed to the existing approved "Phase I" or "Phase II
development plans for Vail Mountain School (approved April 24, 2000) prior to the
commencement of construction, the applicant shall return to the Planning and
Environmental Commission and Design Review Board for review and approval of the
amended development plan.
That the conditional use permit for both temporary structures shall expire on May 31,
2003. However, if a building permit has not been issued for the construction of the
approved development plan for the school by June 1, 2002, this conditional use
permit will expire on that date.
4. The existing mechanical equipment behind the school must be screened during the
summer of 2001, subject to review and approval by the Town of Vail Design Review
Board-
7. A request for a conditional use permit, to amend an existing conditional use permit, to allow
for one additional Fractional Fee Club unit, located at Vail Mountain Lodge, 352 E. Meadow
Drive /Part of Tract B, Vail Village 1" Filing.
Applicant: Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: George Ruther
MOTION: Brian Doyon SECOND:. Doug Cahill VOTE: 5 -0
APPROVED
8. A request for a recommendation to the Town Council on a zoning code text amendment to
Section 12 -7H -7, (Exterior Alterations or Modifications), to correct an error in the prescribed
procedure for certain types of Design Review applications for properties in the Lionshead
Mixed -Use 1 Zone District.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: Brian Doyon VOTE: 5 -0
APPROVED
9. A request for a final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of Phase
I of Donovan Park improvements, generally located southeast of the intersection of
Matterhorn Circle and the South Frontage Road.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 9, 2001
10. A final review of a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for a rezoning from
Agriculture and Open Space to Primary /Secondary Residential and a Minor Subdivision to
create two residential lots and a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for an
amendment to the Vail Land Use Plan changing the land use designation from Public/Semi-
Public use to Low Density Residential, located at 3160 Booth Falls Road /Part of Lot 12,
Block 2, Vail Village 12 Fling.
Applicant: Boothfalls Homeowners Association, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: Russell Forrest
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 9, 2001
11. A request for a variance from Section 12 -7H -10 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for an
proposed addition in the rear setback, located at 660 West Lionshead Place /Lot 1, Vail
Lionshead 1 Filing, 1 Addition.
Applicant: Lions Square Condo Association
Planner: Bill Gibson
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 23, 2001
12. A request for a worksession to discuss a proposed special development district to allow for
the construction of a new conference facility /hotel; and a final review of conditional use
permits to allow for the construction of fractional fee units and Type III employee housing
units at 13 Vail Road I Lots A, B, C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 2.
Applicant: Doramar Hotels, represented by the Daymer Corporation
Planner: Brent Wilson
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 23, 2001
13. A request for a major amendment to Special Development District #4, to allow for the
conversion of an existing indoor tennis court to a spa, located at 1295 Westhaven
Drive /Cascade Village.
Applicant: L -O Vail Hotel Inc.
Planner: Allison Ochs
WITHDRAWN
14. Approval of March 12, 2001 minutes
15. Information Update
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479 -2356, Telephone for the
Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
•
40,
40
4
MEMORANDUM
•
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a Type 11 employee housing
unit located at 185 Forest Road l Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Village 1 Filing.
Applicant: Oscar Tang, Represented by Ray Nielsen
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
i. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE
In September and December of 1992, the Town Council passed Ordinances 9 and 27, Series
of 1992, to create Chapter 13 (Employee Housing) which provides for the addition of
Employee Housing Units (EHUs) as permitted or conditional uses within certain zone districts.
In April of 2000, the Town Council passed Ordinance 6, Series of 2000, to repeal and reenact
this chapter and provide additional incentives for the creation of employee housing in Vail. In
Section 12 -2 -2, an Employee Housing Unit is defined as follows:
Section 12 -2 -2
Employee Housing Unit (EHU): A dwelling unit which shall not be leased or
rented for any period less than thirty (30) consecutive days, and shall be rented
only to tenants who are full -time employees of ,Eagle County. EHUs shall be
allowed in certain ,zone districts as set forth in this Title (Section 12 -13).
Development standards for EHUs shall be as provided in Chapter 13,
"Employee Housing" of this Title. For the purposes of this definition, a `full -time"
employee shall mean a person who works a minimum of an average of thirty
(30) hours per week. There shall be five (5) categories of EHUs: Type 1, Type fl,
Type Ill, Type 1V, and Type V. Provisions relating to each type of EHU are set
forth in Chapter 13, "Employee Housing" of this Title.
The applicant is proposing a Type II employee housing unit above a two -car garage in
connection with a new single family residence, The employee housing unit will be
approximately 488 square feet in size and will include one bathroom, a full kitchen, a living
room, and one bedroom. Two enclosed parking spaces are proposed for the EHU. The
applicant is proposing to utilize the 500 square foot GRFA credit.
•
?M OF VAIL
' -r
1111. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends approval of this application for a Type
11 Employee Housing Unit, based on the following findings:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of
Section 12 -13 (Employee Housing) 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
Section 12 -16 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Vail Municipal Code.
If the Planning and Environmental Commission chooses to approve this application, the
Community Development Department recommends the following conditions:
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Community Development
Department shall receive proof from the applicant that a Type II Restrictive
Covenant has been recorded with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's
Office, thereby ensuring that the employee housing unit will be permanently
restricted for employee housing. 0
Please note that under Section 12 -16 of the Vail Town Code, the approval of a conditional use
permit shall lapse and become void if a building permit is not obtained and construction not
commenced and diligently pursued toward completion, or the use for which the approval has
been granted has not commenced within two years from when the approval becomes final.
0
K1
0 III. ZONING ANALYSIS
Lot Size: 20,255 s.f.
Zoning: Two - Family Primary/Secondary Residential
Standard
Allowed
Existing
Proposed
Total GRFA
5,126 s.f. ( +500 s.f. -EHU)
Demo
5,198 s.f. + 488 s.f. EHU
Primary
5,126 s.f.
Demo
5,198 s.f.
EHU
300 -1200 s.f.
N/A
488 s. f. (using 500 s. f credit)
Site Coverage
3,038 s.f. (15 %)
Demo
3,0198 s.f.
Parking
3 spaces required for Primary unit
3 spaces (2 enclosed)
2 spaces required for EHU
2 spaces f2 enclosed
5 spaces total (4 enclosed)
Setbacks
20/15/15
shall comply with code
Landscaping
12,153 s.f. (required)
shall comply with code
Outdoor Lighting
20 fixtures above 18"
shall comply with code
IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
A. Consideration of Factors
Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the Planning and Environmental
Commission shall consider the factors with respect to the proposed use:
Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the
Town.
When the Town Council adopted the Town of Vail Affordable Housing
Study on November 20, 1990, it recognized a need to increase the
supply of locals /employee housing units. The Town encourages EHUs
as a means of providing quality living conditions and expanding the
supply of employee housing for both year -round and seasonal local
residents. The proposed unit will have a positive impact on the Town's
rental housing needs.
2, The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population
transportation facilities utilities schools arks and recreation facilities
and other public facilities needs
Staff believes that there will be little impact from the proposed Type 11
EHU on light, air, population, transportation, utilities, schools or parks.
•
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive
and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control access
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas.
Two additional vehicles are anticipated in association with this EHU.
Two enclosed parking spaces are proposed. Staff feels that this would
be an insignificant impact on the above- referenced criteria. Snow
storage will be accommodated on the property. The driveway area and
entrance, as proposed, comply with applicable development standards.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be
located includin the he scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses
The Planning and Environmental Commission has approved other Type
II Employee Housing Units in this neighborhood. A Type II EHU was
approved at 265 Forest Road in July, 1999 and another Type 11 EHU was
approved at 375 Forest Road in June, 2000. This proposal is very
similar. The scale and bulk of the proposed structure is also similar to
those in existence in the surrounding neighborhood. Staff believes that
the proposal will not significantly impact the scale and bulk of this project
in relation to surrounding uses.
5_ Employee Housing_ Units may be allowed as a conditional use in those
zone districts as specified by Section 12 -13 of the Vail Municipal Code,
Employee Housing and shall be subject to the following requirements.
a. Zonina districts permitted by right or by conditional use.
Type II EHUs are a conditional use in the Single - Family Residential, Two
Family Residential, Two - Family Primary/Secondary Residential, and
Agriculture & Open Space zone districts. The subject property is zoned
Two - Family Primary/Secondary Residential.
b. Ownership/Transference.
The EHU shall not be sold or transferred separately from the unit it is
associated with. The applicant is not proposing to sell or transfer the
EHU separately from the free - market dwelling units.
c. Additional GRFA,
The EHU is entitled to an additional 500 s.f. GRFA credit which the
applicant is proposing to utilize.
•
n
d. Garage Credit/Storacte Reauirement
A 300 s.f. garage credit is allowed for the EHU. All units not constructed
with a garage shall be required a minimum 75 s.f. of storage area in
addition to normal closet space. This 75 s.f. shall be a credit for storage
only. The applicant is proposing to utilize the 300 s.f. garage credit to
accommodate the required parking spaces for the EHU. Because the
300 s.f. credit can not accommodate two enclosed parking spaces at
current development standards, the remainder of the garage area can be
constructed using the garage credit allowed for this site. In other words,
this site may have two dwelling units, each one eligible to receive up to
600 s.f. of garage credit. Only one of those units is being constructed
resulting in a garage credit surplus that can be used for the EHU garage.
e. Parking
Parking requirements for EHUs are per Chapter 12 -10. The proposed
EHU will be 488 s.f. in size and requires two parking spaces_ The
applicant is proposing two enclosed parking spaces for the EHU.
f. Minimum /Maximum GR#"A of an EHU
The minimum square footage for a Type II EHU is 300 s.f. and the
maximum square footage is 1,200 s_f. The proposed EHU will be 488
square feet in size
g. Densit
The EHU does not count towards density.
B. Findings:
The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings
before granting a conditional use permit for an Employee Housing Unit:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes
of Section 12 -13 (Employee Housing) 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 Section 12 -16 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Vail
Municipal Code.
5
m_
m
C _
CL
(9
2
•
CL
(a
G
•
0
i
•
r1
L J
1J
. l � A
4)
•
•
Z
0
W
J
W
S
Q
C1?
Z
Q
F-
LU
2
F-
CC
•
•
•
•
F-
Q
Lij
W
F-
C!)
Q.
LLJI
lJ
Z
O
F=-
Q
W
W
•
•
{
j
4�
T
00
z
Cl-
8
J
U-
W
LU
Cr
uj
CL
a
if
cr-
C3
CV)
e%,i
z
45
IL
CC
LLJ
t
It
z
LU
•
•
I
L72
-A
•
I
cV
co
O
O
uj
LU
I
U-
i=
CD
0
N
co
rr— tN
L?!
J
J
W
W
I
£:
C"3
•
MEMORANDUM
0 TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit to allow for a Type II employee housing unit located
at 1552 Matterhorn Circle (Lot 2, Timber Vail Subdivision).
Applicants: Ranch Creek Development
Planner: Bill Gibson
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED USE
In September and December of 1992, the Town Council passed Ordinances 9 and 27, Series of 1992, to
create Chapter 13 (,Employee Housing) which provides for the addition of Employee Housing Units (EHUs)
as permitted or conditional uses within certain zone districts. In April of 2000, the Town Council passed
Ordinance B, Series of 2000, to repeal and reenact this chapter and provide additional incentives for the
creation of employee housing in Vail. In Section 12 -2 -2, an Employee Housing Unit is defined as follows:
Section 12 -2 -2
Employee Housing Unit (EHU)_ A dwelling unit which shall not be leased or rented for any
period less than thirty (30) consecutive days, and shall be rented only to tenants who are
full -time employees of Eagle County. EHUs shall be allowed in certain zone districts as
set forth in this Title (Section 12 -13). Development standards for EHUs shall be as
provided in Chapter 13, `Employee Housing" of this Title. For the purposes of this
definition, a `full -time" employee shall mean a person who works a minimum of an
average of thirty (30) hours per week. There shall be five (5) categories of EHUs: Type 1,
Type 11, Type lll, Type !V, and Type V. Provisions relating to each type of EHU are set
forth in Chapter 13, "Employee Housing" of this Title.
The applicant is proposing to construct a single- family residential structure on this property, and construct
a Type II employee housing unit. The proposed development of this property is currently in the Design
Review process. The proposed EHU will be approximately 503 square feet in size; and the applicant is
proposing to utilize the additional 500 square foot GRFA credit. The proposed EHU will be a studio style
unit with a kitchenette and a bathroom.
This proposed EHU is consistent with the Town of Vail's Type II EHU criteria for review:
• The proposed EHU will have a positive relationship and impact of the use on the development
objectives of the Town.
• The proposed EHU will have an in sign ificant'impact on light, air, population, transportation,
utilities, schools or parks.
• The proposed EHU will have little effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion,
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas.
• The proposed EHU will not have a negative effect upon the character of the area in which the
proposed use is to be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
• The proposed EHU meets the Town's requirements for zoning, ownership /tranference, GRFA,
garage credit/storage, parking, and density.
TOW *Ma
'x
II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends approval of this application for a Type 11
Employee Housing Unit, based on the following findings:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance with the purposes of Section 12 -13
(Employee Housing) 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.
3_ That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of Section 12-
16 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Vail Municipal Code.
If the Planning and Environmental Commission chooses to approve this application, the Community
Development Department recommends the following condition:
1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a Type 11 EHU deed
restriction to the Town of Vail Department of Community Development. This document
shall be recorded at the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office and will require that
the employee housing unit be permanently restricted for employee housing_
2_ The Conditional Use Permit for the proposed EHU is contingent upon Design Review
approval.
Please note that under Section 12 -16 of the Vail Town Code, the approval of a conditional use permit shall
lapse and become void if a building permit is not obtained and construction not commenced and diligently
pursued toward completion, or the use for which the approval has been granted has not commenced
within two years from when the approval becomes final.
Ill. ZONING ANALYSIS
Size: 16,544 sq. ft. (0.3798 acres)
ing: Single -Famiy Residential
Total GRFA 3,954 sq.ft. + 500 EHU = 4,454sq.ft. 4,415 sq.ft. / 39 sq.ft.
Primary 3,954 sq.ft 3,912 sq.ft.
EHU 300 - 1,200 sq.ft. (max. 500 sq.ft. credit) 503 sq.ft.
Fotal Site Coverage 3,309 sq.ft. 2,612 sq.ft. / 697 sq.ft.
Required
Total Parking 5 spaces
Primary 3 spaces
EHU 2 spaces
3 enclosed & 2 surface spaces
2 enclosed & 1 surface space
1 enclosed & 1 surface space
•
•
•
E
IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
0 A. Consideration of Factors
Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the Planning and Environmental
Commission shall consider the factors with respect to the proposed use:
Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the Town.
When the Town Council adopted the Town of Vail Affordable Housing Study on
November 20, 1990, it recognized a need to increase the supply of
locals/employee housing units. The Town encourages EHU's as a means of
providing quality living conditions and expanding the supply of employee housing
for both year -round and seasonal local residents. The proposed unit will have a
positive impact on the Town's rental housing needs.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation
facilities, utilities, schools. parks and recreation facilities. and other public facilities
needs
Staff believes that there will be little impact from the proposed Type 11 EHU on
light, air, population, transportation, utilities, schools or parks.
Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas
Two additional vehicles are anticipated in association with this EHU, and one
enclosed and one surface parking space is proposed. Staff feels this will be an
insignificant impact to the above - referenced criteria.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located,
including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses
The EHU will be located within a residential dwelling that is currently in the Design
Review process. Staff believes that the Design Review process will ensure that
the proposed EHU will not significantly impact the scale and bulk of this project in
relation to surrounding uses. Staff also believes that this proposal is consistent
with the development standards applicable to this property.
5. Employee Housing Units may allowed as a conditional use in those zone
districts as specified by Section 12 -13 of the Vail Municipal Code, Employee
Housing and shall be subject to the following requirements:
a. Zoning districts permitted by right or by conditional use.
Type II EHU's are a conditional use in the Single- Family Residential, Two Family
Residential, Primary /Secondary Residential, and Agriculture & Open Space zone
districts. The subject property is zoned Single - Family Residential.
•
3
b. Ownership/Transference.
The EHU shall not be sold or transferred separately from the unit it is associated
with. The applicants are not proposing to sell or transfer the EHU separately from
the primary dwelling unit.
c. Additional GRFA.
The EHU is entitled to an additional 500 sq.ft. GRFA credit. The applicant is
proposing to utilize all 500 sq. ft. of that credit.
d. Garage Credit/Storage Requirement
An addtional 300 sq.ft. of garage area credit is allowed for the EHU. The
applicant is proposing to utilize 229 sq.ft. of the credit.
e. Parking
The parking requirements for EHU's are subject to Chapter 12 -10. This EHU is
proposed to be 503 sq.ft. in size, therefore two parking space are required. The
applicant is proposing to provide one enclosed and one surface parking space.
f. Minimum /Maximum GRFA of an EHU
Type II EHU's are allowed with a GRFA minimum of 300 sq.ft. and a GRFA
maximum of 1,200 sq.ft. This EHU is proposed to be 503 sq. ft. in size.
q. Density
At this time, the applicant is proposing to construct a primary dwelling unit and a
Type 11 EHU on this site. The EHU will not count as density.
B. Findings:
The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before
granting a conditional use permit for an Employee Housing Unit:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the purposes of Section
12 -13 (Employee Housing) 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.
3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of
Section 12 -16 (Conditional Use Permits) of the Vail Municipal Code.
•
LI
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE: March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a rear setback variance from Section 12 -6C -6, Vail Town Code,
to allow for an addition to an two - family residence, located at 5027 Ute
Lane /Lot 31 Vail Meadows 1" Filing.
Applicant: Larry and Renee Okubo
Planner: Bill Gibson
L DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicants, Larry and Renee Okubo, are the owners of 5027 Ute Lane, Unit B (Lot 31 Vail
Meadows 1st Filing). The applicants are requesting a variance from the rear setback
requirements of the Two - Family Residential Zoning District to allow for the construction of a 666
square foot two -story addition (with an upper story deck) to the rear of the existing Unit B that
will extend to within 3 feet of the rear property line. The applicant believes this location for the
addition is dictated by the existing floor plan and will be the least obtrusive location for an
addition to the adjacent property owners and the natural features of this site. A copy of the site
plan has been attached for reference.
II. BACKGROUND
The existing residential structures located on the adjacent Lots 30 and 32 of Vail Meadows 1
Filing are nonconforming in regard to the required side setbacks adjacent to this property. The
structure on Lot 30 (south and east of this site) was granted a side setback variance to avoid
avalanche hazards and is located within 9 feet of the property line adjacent to this site. This
site is affected by "possible avalanche influence ", however this hazard designation does not
restrict the development potential of this site. The structure on Lot 32 (north of this site) was
originally constructed in Eagle County and only meets the original 10 -foot setback requirement
from the property line adjacent to this site.
An intermittent stream with dense, mature aspens lining its banks bisects this lot into east and
west halves. Also, a significant number of existing aspens are located on the eastern portion
of this site.
At their June 23, 1980 meeting, the Planning and Environmental Commission approved a rear
setback variance allowing for the original construction of this duplex on Lot 31, Vail Meadows
1 st Filing within 3 feet of the rear property line. The Planning and Environmental Commission
approved that variance request based upon "man -made and natural hardships" (i.e. location
of structures on adjacent properties, location of the intermittent stream, and the location of
existing stands of aspens).
•
TOWN OF PAIL k
In accordance with the approved June 23, 1980 variance, the existing duplex was constructed
on this site in such a manner that Unit A was located within 3 feet of the rear property line and
Unit B was located within approximately 11.5 feet of the rear property line. 0
Ill. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested setback
variances subject to the following findings-
That the granting of the setback variances does not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the Two - family
Residential Zone District.
2. That the strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the setback regulations results in
a practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the development
objectives of the Municipal Code or the Two - family Residential Zone District.
3. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
applicant's property that do not apply generally to other properties in the Two - family
Residential Zone District.
Should the PEC choose to approve this request, the Community Development Department
recommends the following condition:.
1. That the applicant submit a site - specific geological investigation, completed by a
professional geologist or registered professional engineer, to the Town for review
and approval prior to final Design Review approval.
IV. REVIEWING BOARD ROLES
The PEC is responsible for evaluating a proposal for
1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and
structures in the vicinity.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a
specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among
sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this Title without grant of special privilege.
3_ The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety,
4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed
variance.
2
•
Desiqn Review Beard:
Action_ The DRB has NO review authority on a variance, but must review any
accompanying DRB application.
The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal for:
- Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings
- Fitting buildings into landscape
Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography
- Removal /Preservation of trees and native vegetation
- Adequate provision for snow storage on -site
- Acceptability of building materials and colors
- Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms
- Provision of landscape and drainage
- Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures
- Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances
- Location and design of satellite dishes
- Provision of outdoor lighting
U. ZONING STATISTICS
40 Lot Size: 23,740 sq.ft. (0.545 acres)
Zoning: Two - family Residential
Development Standard
Allowed/Required
E2ij§i
Proposed Remaining
Unit A Setbacks:
Front:
20'
91'
91'
Sides:
15'
31791
31785'
Rear:
15'
3'
3'
Unit B Setbacks:
Front:
20'
108'
108'
Sides:
15'
217125'
217125'
Rear:
15'
11.5'
3'
Total GRFA:
5,474 sq.ft.
3,803 sq.ft.
4,703 sq.ft. 771 sq.ft.
GRFA Unit A:
2,332 sq.ft.
2,620 sq.ft.
GRFA Unit B:
1,471 sq.ft.
2,083 sq.ft.
Site Coverage:
4,748 sq.ft. (20%)
2,024 sq.ft.
2,656 sq.ft. 2,092 sq.ft.
•
3
VI. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
A. Consideration of Factors Regarding the Setback Variances
1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential
uses and structures in the vicinity.
The existing residential structures located on the adjacent Lots 30 and 32 of
Vail Meadows 1" Filing encroach into the required side setbacks adjacent to
this property.
An intermittent stream with dense, mature aspens lining its banks bisects this
lot into east and west halves. Also, a significant number of existing aspens
are located on the eastern portion of this site.
To lesson the impacts of development from this site to adjacent properties
and natural features, on dune 23, 1930 the Planning and Environmental
Commission approved a variance request allowing for the original
construction of Unit A within 3 feet of the rear property line and Unit B within
11.5 feet of the rear property line.
Staff does not believe that there will be any negative impacts associated with
this proposai on the above - listed criteria.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or
to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege.
The existing duplex structure on this lot was originally constructed in the
southwestern ,portion of the lot to minimize the impacts to an existing
intermittent stream and existing stands of aspens. This duplex was also
located in its current location to minimize the impacts to the adjacent
properties, both of which are nonconforming with regard to side setbacks
adjacent to this site. As proposed, approximately 254 square feet of the
proposed 666 square foot rear addition to Unit B will be located within the rear
setback.
Staff does not believe this proposal will constitute a grant of special privilege.
Staff also does not believe that there will be any negative impacts associated
with this proposal on the above - listed criteria
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
Staff does not believe that there will be any negative impacts associated with
this proposal on the above - listed criteria.
r:
Is
B. The Plannin and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings before
granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same
district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical
hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally
to other properties in the same zone.
C. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of
other properties in the same district.
r�
ICJ
f�J
5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE: March 20, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a variance from Section 12 -7D -5 of the Vail Town Code, to
allow for the addition of mechanical equipment within the required rear
setback at the Brandess Building, located at 2077 N. Frontage Rd. /Lot
39A, Buff ehr Creek Subdivision.
Applicant: Jayne Brandess Revocable Trust, represented by Abacus
Communications
Planner: Allison Ochs
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
•
The applicant, Jayne Brandess Revocable Trust, represented by Abacus
Communications, is requesting a rear setback variance to allow for the placement of
Sprint PCS telecommunications equipment behind the Brandess Building, located at
2077 N. Frontage Road / Lot 39 Buffer Creek. The property is currently zoned
Commercial Core III, which requires a minimum 20 ft. setback from all property lines_
The equipment cabinets are proposed at the northeast corner of the property within the
required 20 ft. setback. The conditional use permit for the telecommunications
equipment was approved on February 12, 2001, with the condition that the applicant
either reconfigure the equipment to comply with the 20 ft. setback or be granted a
variance by the Planning and Environmental Commission. The applicant has
reconfigured the equipment_ However, it still encroaches 3 ft. into the required setback,
allowing for a 17 ft. setback from the rear property line.
According to Section 12 -7D -5; Setbacks
In the Commercial Core 3 District, the setback shall be twenty feet (20) on all
exterior boundaries of the Zone district.
11. REVIEWING BOARD ROLES - VARIANCE
Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental
Commission is responsible for approval /denial of a variance. The Planning and
Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal for:
11
A.
TOWN OF VAIL �
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and
structures in the vicinity. 0
2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement
of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of
treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this Title
without grant of special privilege.
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety.
4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the
proposed variance.
Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority on a
variance request, but must review any accompanying Design Review Board application.
Ill. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission deny the applicant's request for a variance from Section 12-
7D-5 of the Town Cade to allow for the installation of mechanical equipment within the
required 20 ft. setback, subject to the criteria as described in Section IV of this memo
and the following findings:
That the granting of the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same
district.
2. That the granting of the variance will be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in
the vicinity.
3. There are no exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally to
other properties in the same zone.
4. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would
not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other
properties in the same district.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve this request,
staff recommends the following condition of approval:
That the applicant is required to provide adequate provisions to screen
the equipment from public view. These provisions will be reviewed during
the design review process.
IV. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
A. Consideration of 'Factors Regarding the Variances:
2
1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or
potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
Adjacent properties to the north of the Brandess Building are zoned
Primary /Secondary. Staff believes that the granting of this variance will
be detrimental to the existing residential character of the lots to the north.
The Brandess Building is zoned Commercial Core lll, which requires a
minimum 20 ft. setback from the perimeter of the zone district. The intent
of this 20 ft. setback from the perimeter of the zone district is to allow for
an adequate buffer from the commercial uses prevalent in the CCIII zone
district. The building currently meets setback requirements.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation
and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity
or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special
privilege.
Staff believes the granting of this variance would result in a grant of
special privilege. First, there is no physical hardship on the site which
would warrant the variance request. Second, the 20 ft. setback from the
perimeter of the CCIII zone district is intended to provide an adequate
buffer of the intense commercial uses within this zone district to
surrounding properties. CCIII does not require the 20 ft, setback between
other lots zoned CCIII. In addition, staff believes that with modifications
10 to the proposed equipment, it is possible to locate the equipment entirely
within required setbacks.
Other properties zoned CCIII include:
• Wendy's — meets 20 ft. setback requirement
• West Wail Mall — meets 20 ft. setback requirement
• West Vail Lodge — meets 20 ft. setback requirement
• City Market — meets 20 ft. setback requirement.
• McDonald's — meets 20 ft. setback requirement
• Vail das Schone — meets 20 ft. setback requirement
• Safeway — meets 20 ft. setback requirement
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
Staff does not believe that the requested variance will have a negative
effect on any of the above - mentioned facilities.
B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings
before granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of
special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other
properties classified in the same district.
N
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the
public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties
or improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following
reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the
specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or
conditions applicable to the same site of the variance that
do not apply generally to other properties in the same
zone.
C. The strict interpretation or
regulation would deprive
enjoyed by the owners of
district.
enforcement of the specified
the applicant of privileges
other properties in the same
f�
•
•
M
•
•
L
�
�QQ
�7
�m
U
-
U
F '
C
2
m e�i
N
O M1S 4
M1 N {
1Ll � 1 1� y
M1 N
r 0 N
r � m
� m
s
N9
<IZ
Abacus Communications, Inc.
10876 Parker Vista Lane
Parker, Co
MISS
Phone: 303 -840 -0455
Fax: 303 - 840.0407
Email: abacuscornmunicationsCaeart .net
To: City of Vail Planning and Zoning department
Fm: Abacus Communications, Inc. (contracted representative of Sprint PCS)
Re: Letter of intent to construct & install wireless telecommunication equipment
Date: 02/22/20 01
LETTER OF INTENT
Sprint PCS d /b /a "Sprint" seeks Zoning approval for a rear property line set back
variance for the installation of telecommunications equipment to be placed at the rear of
the Brandess Building located at 2077 N. Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657, City of Vail
Colorado.
The Site will be used by Sprint for the purpose of operating a personal communications
service system facility ( "PCS "). The purpose of this installation is to provide additional
wireless telecommunication coverage for the Town of Vail Colorado.
Installation will consist of equipment cabinets to be located at the rear of the building
(please refer to zoning drawings for detail). Wood siding to match existing building
exterior shall surround all equipment.
The conditions for this set back variance are as follows:
1. Sprint PCS's equipment layout encroaches (s) three feet into the City of Vail's
20' rear setback requirement.
2. Sprint has exhausted all other design options trying to comply with the 20'
setback requirement.
• The equipment could not be installed on the roof of the building due to the
weight of the equipment.
• Installing the equipment in the building was not an option. The only available
space was on the second floor and again the equipment weight was too much for
the building design.
• Sharing interior room with AT& T wireless was not possible due to inadequate
space.
3. Sprint's original design showed the equipment on the East side of the building.
The redesign keeps all the equipment at the rear of the building and much less
visible compared to the original design.
Glen Klocke
Abacus Communications, Inc.
Representing Sprint PCS
A Name You Can Count On
r1
C.
H
z
z
Z
W
�.� a
Y$ 8
0
uj
z
z R a
• � � LLI Ln
�--
g; N
Ln
Q 61
"v3 w 8 �a g 0
CA p 0 L)
CLW'd`��
a �
z
LU c
a r
U
LLJ
I I f f Iry.! 4
� .� •� et 19h1i J �} u i 3 1
f E
i ; t
e Of
v�
uu
,
I
I
X
to
H
z
z
Z
W
�.� a
Y$ 8
0
uj
z
z R a
• � � LLI Ln
�--
g; N
Ln
Q 61
"v3 w 8 �a g 0
CA p 0 L)
CLW'd`��
a �
z
LU c
a r
U
LLJ
I I f f Iry.! 4
� .� •� et 19h1i J �} u i 3 1
f E
i ; t
e Of
v�
,
I
I
X
to
17
1
1 5 tl
z W
CL
uu
LU
a
r
w
a
7
"��` �` � fr � ..cam _ } •.,, � _s— ... _ � � r''�
Q , e
jj a �� eae
r ggyggy
5
w O
c _ '• .• r 3 � ��j q ���� 3 e e ur 5 '� 44cc a �- a [C
LU
�q�sAr w
"��Y� M3ak3'� W
CL
gi
J p s ¢ k b l e se93eC$�4p� a §991�Jp6 yyg E
OW.. a b�9p�99999����1 b
•
0
a
=—
� 5v5vyy
0
m
o
� 7
C
17
1
1 5 tl
z W
CL
uu
LU
a
r
w
a
7
"��` �` � fr � ..cam _ } •.,, � _s— ... _ � � r''�
Q , e
jj a �� eae
r ggyggy
5
w O
c _ '• .• r 3 � ��j q ���� 3 e e ur 5 '� 44cc a �- a [C
LU
�q�sAr w
"��Y� M3ak3'� W
CL
gi
J p s ¢ k b l e se93eC$�4p� a §991�Jp6 yyg E
OW.. a b�9p�99999����1 b
•
0
C
!
17
1
1 5 tl
z W
CL
uu
LU
a
r
w
a
7
"��` �` � fr � ..cam _ } •.,, � _s— ... _ � � r''�
Q , e
jj a �� eae
r ggyggy
5
w O
c _ '• .• r 3 � ��j q ���� 3 e e ur 5 '� 44cc a �- a [C
LU
�q�sAr w
"��Y� M3ak3'� W
CL
gi
J p s ¢ k b l e se93eC$�4p� a §991�Jp6 yyg E
OW.. a b�9p�99999����1 b
•
0
j i
an [.
C V )
� I
Z
LU a
w
Q !J7 W
•
i
i
i
i
1
S�
�I alyll }1�n90xfd _.
O-L�s
I
It
I ,
I ; III
� liE
III A
I ape L
I ; " H
o I;
qtl
I.!
EsI
t
t �
I
f
I
C)
w
a
Q
J
GIL
J
d
2
r
Y �1J
I <
µ k�
m
Q .Z
W d
S x?'o a N g S C7 J
s�
V W z
ct
a 1 i v! QI t ZI L fA
`I
I � m'b?d�hea
I �
I
i
I
I i I
I I Pi
I � I Iii
N I i i
I � Iii
f , I
I I I
II i I Pi r
II ; I lii`
'11I Iii
P � I Iii
1
II i I I
i t I i i
I i I li�
j
I � I X1
1 01
1 1 I
III
I
1 � f
I�
S`
I
� i I
{I
I I
I I I
I
1 - ,, 7 - 7
I I
o I
N t >I iA
I
I
I
1
I
P
r
i
I
I
I
I� I
I d
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
I
I c�
4�
G
P
I c_�
— � I
_ I
I�
3
;f s
z
CL
mix! p a a €i t F ii
e
A
K
W
4
U
h-
O
Y
J
z
Lu
jc)
m
IL
0
W
t
•
0
ti
w
3
CC
a
2
03/13/2001 12:57 3038400407 ABACUS CQMK NICATION
Maw-20-01 01:30P I<Qn'rith Clark Assoc• 3037539348
STRUCTURAL
CONSULTANTS
INCORPORATED
March 14, 2001
Mr. Kevin Raymond
KENt1f ITti CLARK ASSOCIATE =S
165o.5. Colorado Blvd., 41204
Denver, Co 80222
Re* lirandas Professional Builoing
SCI OOM46 23
Dear Kevrr:
At your request we have Svlswed ttte fesasialiity of installing me proposed sprint
equipment platform on the roof of the second fepor of the Brandes Building
The structure Is a wood `rand building wrxh would be overstressed if we edc 12,00
pounds of equipment to the Boasting floor or roof it would be expansive to strengihsn the
buildirp as we would have to install new steel beams and columns extending down, to tine
fnundatio-t walls
We feei a better elternative would tae to instar the equipment platform on the ground
behind or neat to the building.
If you have any questions p188ee Ca l
Sincerely,
STRUCTURAL. cONSULTANT ;. INC
Lorin Udbermon
LlLlblrm
prq., i�rr6
�1tils: •,rr H
Ei
FACE 02
P_02
senmw Alum idl� ;40—
t
•
•
C7
n
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Department of Community Development
DATE: March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a modification to an existing conditional use permit to allow
for the use of two modular classroom units at Vail Mountain School,
located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road / Lot 12, Block 2, Vail Village 12
Filing.
Applicant: Vail Mountain School, represented by Gwathmey Pratt
Schultz Architects
Planner. Brent Wilson
L BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
On June 15, 1999, the Vail Town Council affirmed the Planning and Environmental
Commission's approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow for the addition of a
modular classroom structure at Vail Mountain School. This approval carried the
following conditions:
1. That the conditional use permit for the temporary structure expire on July 1,
2000; unless an extension to July 1, 2001 is granted by the Planning and
Environmental Commission.
2. That the temporary structure be removed from the property on or before July 1,
2000; unless an extension is granted by the Planning and Environmental
Commission. The Commission may extend the approval subject to the applicant
submitting a long -term plan for improvements to the town for review and
approval. The extension may be granted for one additional year and expire on
July 1, 2001.
3. That the applicant submit a written statement to the Town of Vail agreeing not to
reappear before the Planning & Environmental Commission with a request for an
extension to the conditional use permit for the temporary structure, ,prior to
installing the structure.
4. That the applicant implement the exterior materials improvements recommended
by the Town of Vail Design Review Board prior to occupying the structure.
Due to unresolved issues with permanent construction solutions at Vail Mountain
School, the applicant is requesting an extension of the previous CUP to allow for a two -
year continuance of the existing modular classroom and the placement of an additional
identical structure to the east of the school building and the log cabin.
•
The modular classrooms are intended to accommodate an increase in the demand for
students to attend the school. The school's headmaster, Peter Abuisi, anticipates a net
increase of 20 students enrolled next year (2001 -2002 school year). Each modular is
classroom is approximately 20'x 60' in size and can accommodate about 18 students.
The applicant is proposing tc keep the existing temporary classroom in its existing
location. The new modular classroom would be located to the east of the log cabin in an
effort to mitigate neighborhood impacts while preserving an adequate area for future
construction staging.
Staff has identified the following outstanding issues involved with long -term
redevelopment or expansion at Vail Mountain School.
• Pending land negotiations between the school and an adjacent property owner.
• Fund raising for construction costs for the approved development plan.
• Resolution of traffic mitigation concerns along the frontage road prior to construction.
Since Vail Mountain School received PEC approval in 2000 for a long -term development
master plan, the rockfall berm has been removed, the property has been re- graded, and
the parking and drop -off areas have been re- aligned. A reduced copy of the proposed
plans and a letter describing the applicant's request have been attached for reference.
II. REVIEWING BOARD ROLES - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Planning and Environmental Commission: The Planning and Environmental
Commission is responsible for approval /denial of a Conditional Use Permit. The
Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a proposal for:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the Town.
2. Effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population, transportation facilities,
utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities, and other public facilities and public
Facilities needs.
3. Effect upon traffic, with particular reference to congestion, automotive and pedestrian
safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access, maneuverability, and
removal of snow from the streets and parking areas_
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be located,
including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to surrounding uses.
Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed
use.
6. The environmental impact report concerning the proposed use, if an environmental
impact report is required by Chapter 12 of this Title.
7. Conformance with development standards of zone district.
2
Design Review Board: The Design Review Board has no review authority on a
Conditional Use Permit. but must review any accompanying Design Review Board
application. In this instance, DRB review will be a condition of approval.
III. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends that the Planning and
Environmental Commission approve the applicant's request for a conditional use permit
to allow for the use of two modular classroom units at Vail Mountain School, subject to
the criteria outlined in Section IV of this memo and the following findings:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance 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.
3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable provisions of the
conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
If the Planning and Environmental Commission chooses to approve this request, staff
recommends the following conditions of approval:
1. That both modular classroom units will comply with all town design guidelines, be
painted to match the existing school building (beige base with brown trim) and
that additional landscaping for buffering will be added surrounding the new
structure_ These issues are subject to review and approval by the Town of Vail
Design Review Board.
2. If any revisions are proposed to the existing approved "Phase I" or "Phase II"
development plans for Vail Mountain School (approved April 24, 2000) prior to
the commencement of construction, the applicant shall return to the Planning and
Environmental Commission and Design Review Board for review and approval of
the amended development plan.
5. That the conditional use permit for both temporary structures shall expire on May
31. 2003.
IV. REQUIRED CRITERIA AND FINDINGS - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
A. CONSIDERATION OF FACTORS
1. Relationship and impact of the use on the development objectives of the
Town.
According to the Official Town of Vail Zoning Map, the Vail Mountain School is
located in the General Use Zone District. The purpose of the General Use Zone
District is to:
3
"provide sites for public and quasi - public uses which, because of their
special characteristics, cannot be appropriately regulated by the
development standards prescribed for other zoning districts, and for
which development standards especially prescribed for each particular
development proposal or project are necessary to achieve the purposes
prescribed in Section 12 -1 -2 of this Title and to provide for the public
welfare. The General Use District is intended to ensure that public
buildings and grounds and certain types of quasi - public uses permitted in
the District are appropriately located and designed to meet the needs of
residents and visitors to Vail, to harmonize with surrounding uses, and, in
the case of buildings and other structures, to ensure adequate light, air,
open spaces, and other amenities appropriate to the permitted types of
uses." (Ord. 21 (1994) § 10).
Sections 12 -9C -2 & 3 outline the permitted and conditional uses allowed in the
General Use Zone District. The temporary modular classrooms are an allowed
conditional use in the General Use Zone District subject to the issuance of a
conditional use permit. Staff believes this proposal is not in compliance with the
provisions of the Town of Vail Design Guidelines. Therefore, staff is
recommending a condition that the temporary structures are reviewed and
approved by the Town of Vail Design Review Board.
The Vail Land Use Plan applies a "Public/Semi-Public" land use designation on
this property. This category includes uses such as schools, post office, water
and sewer service and storage facilities, cemeteries, municipal facilities, and
other institutions which are located throughout the community to serve the needs
of residents.
Staff believes this proposal is in compliance with all applicable objectives of the
Vail Land Use Plan. Staff believes the proposal furthers the following specific
goals:
1.1 Vail should continue to grow in a controlled environment, maintaining a
balance between residential, commercial and recreational uses to serve
both the visitor and the permanent resident.
61 Services should keep pace with increased growth.
Staff does not believe this proposal conflicts with any of the goals, objectives, or
policies stated in the Vail Land Use Plan.
Although Vail Mountain School signed•an agreement stating it would not return
for an extension of this request, the school has a right to re -apply and the town
has an obligation to bring the application through the development review
process. Staff believes there are outstanding issues that preclude the school's
ability to commence construction in the immediate future.
4
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation facilities,
and other public facilities needs.
The requested conditional use permit will have positive effects on the immediate
needs of the school to meet growing demands. Each temporary classroom will
allow the school to provide educational opportunities for up to 18 students. The
structures will also provide the Board with additional time to pursue expansion
opportunities to meet the school's long -term needs. It should be noted that the
temporary classrooms should not be considered as a long -term solution to the
school's demand for space.
Staff does not believe this request will have any negative impacts upon the other
above- listed facilities.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion, automotive and
pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, access,
maneuverability, and removal of snow from the street and parking areas.
Vail Mountain School recently took measures to realign their parking and drop -off
areas in an effort to provide a more efficient circulation system. Thus far, the
result has been positive with a significant reduction in traffic congestion along the
frontage road during peak periods. The re- alignment of the parking circulation
provides additional "staging" area for cars on -site during peak "drop off" periods.
Vail Mountain School states the additional (18 -20 student) capacity of the new
modular structure should not impact parking needs as the students (high school
freshmen) will not have parking privileges at the school.
Staff does not believe this request will have any negative impacts upon the other
above - listed issues.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to be
located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in relation to
surrounding uses.
Staff believes that due to the exterior improvements proposed (including
landscaping), the location of the structure on the school site, and the temporary
nature of the building, the temporary classrooms will have minimal negative
impacts on the character of the area. The proposed structures comply with
previously approved setback provisions on the property.
B. FINDINGS
The Planning and Environmental Commission shall_ make the following findings
before granting a conditional use permit:
1. That the proposed location of the use is in accordance 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.
5
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.
3. That the proposed use would comply with each of the applicable
provisions of the conditional use permit section of the zoning code.
•
0
A
VadMountain School
•
February 27, 2001
Mr. Brent Wilson
Town of Vail
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Dear Mr. Wilson:
Vail Mountain School has submitted a request for a conditional use permit to extend the
lease on the modular unit placed on campus in August, 1999. We also may request placement of a
second modular unit on campus. These requests are being made to help us through the period of
fund raising, final building design, and construction. It is our hope and our intention to begin
building in May, 2002 with completion before December of that year. .
A master plan for the campus was approved on April 24, 2000, and we went to work
immediately on the first steps of addressing it. As of this time we have cleared the land for
construction at a cost of $325,000 and have developed working drawings with the architectural
firm of Gwathmey Pratt Schultz Architects, and Beck and Associates, the contractor. We have
hired a professional fund raising team whose work will be completed in May, at which time we
will implement all of the fund raising strategies which we have been developing since the fall of
this academic year.
We hope you will view the steps already taken as an earnest effort to replace the temporary
building and the second one we are requesting at the soonest possible time with a permanent
structure that will add to our program and enhance the neighborhood. Thank you for your
consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
Peter M. Abuisi
Headmaster
A
•
3160 KATSOS RANCH ROAD - VAIL, COLORADO 81657 - 970- 476 -3850 - FAX 970 -476 -3860
•
•
Sent By: GWATHMEY PRATT SCHULTZ ARCHITECT;970 476 1612; Mar-14-01 13:
/ f
�� J w �� f �x r�mn
coo
0
PH
ig
38; Page 212
a �
4D
PA IL
%—. z
r
I , <
0
N � � ��
lI i t
f I � �� .�,o
ff 11
7 ��
ff
<
lu
Z '
- �- 1 :e : �bf-m r r<LIM 5NuwuuN ANN HUW� 1 N�:i �:J / 041b iatJ t �_ e
F
` )ai l ountai» Sch
•
i�FFI�lL•iL'I`:'7
Town of Vail
Design Review Board
75 South Frontage Road
Vail CO 81658
Dear Design Review Board Members:
Thank you for considering our request to place a modular classrvorn on campus for
academic years 1999 -2000 and 2000- 2001. Having this temporary space will allow us to offer our
program to a new grade of students and to create a more suitable computer Jab.
I appreciate your concern that the modular unit would be removed after two years (twenty -
tour rnonths). We would be pleased to commit to that time limitation. We are honorable people
and would not enter into this agreement with false intentions.
Please contact me if you have questions or wish to view the site. Thank You for your
consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
C _4& a _ ea�
Peter M. Abuisi
Headmaster
! MA
•
3160 KATSOS RANCH ROAD - -VAIL, COLORADO 81657 - (070) 476 -3850 - FAX (970) 476 -3860
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 26, 2041
SUBJECT: A request for variances from Section 12 -6D -6 (Setbacks) and Title .14
(Development Standards- locating required parking in the Right -of -Way), to
allow for a residential addition and remodel located at 2955 Bellflower Dr. /
Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain.
Applicant: Alan Peters, represented by Braun Associates
Planner: Allison Ochs
1. BACKROUND OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
In June of 1978, a building permit was issued by Eagle County to build a single - family house
on Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain. This neighborhood was subsequently annexed by the
Town of Vail. The house is nonconforming with regards to setbacks and lot size. In 1983,
the owner of Lot 6 received approval to construct a secondary unit on the lot. At the time,
the regulations required that 50% of the required parking be enclosed. The applicant
received a variance from this requirement- The variance was granted based on the difficulty
of building a garage on the site, specifically the Planning and Environmental Commission
found, "the garage would tend to overcrowd the lot and would impair the common open
space between the residence and the residence to the west."
The applicant originally appeared before the Planning and Environmental Commission on
February 12, 2001. The applicant has since reduced the extent of the variances requested
(see below).
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The current owner, Alan Peters, originally submitted an application for a site coverage
variance, a GRFA variance, and front and side setback variances. Recent changes in the
Town's EHU regulations made the site coverage variance unnecessary. In addition, the
applicant has withdrawn the request for the GRFA variance. However, the applicant is still
requesting the front and side yard setback variances, and has added a request for a
variance from the requirement that all required parking be located on -site.
The applicant's entire letter describing the request has been attached for reference, as have
reductions of the proposal. The descriptions of the variances requested are as follows:
•
Front Setback: The applicant is requesting a variance to allow for a front
setback of 9 ft. The proposal includes approximately 113 sq. ft. of GRFA in the
*VAILTOW N O
front setback and approximately 101 sq. ft. of the garage within the front setback.
Side Setback (west): The applicant is requesting a side setback variance to
allow for a west side setback of 9.5 ft. The proposal includes approximately 151
sq. ft. of GRFA and approximately 23 sq. ft. of the proposed garage in the west
setback.
3. Side Setback (east): The applicant is requesting a side setback variance to
allow for an east side setback of 11.9 fit. The proposed addition on the east side
of the structure would allow an additional 9 sq. ft. of GRFA in east side setback. This
setback is currently non- conforming, with a setback of 11.8 ft. and approximately 230
sq. ft. of GRFA in the side setback.
4. Parking in the right -of -way: The applicant is requesting a variance from the
requirement that all required parking must be located on site. The residence
requires a total of 3 parking spaces (2 for primary and 1 for EHU). One of the
parking spaces encroaches up to 9 ft. into the right -of -way.
Ill. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department recommends approval of the requested setback
and parking location variances subject to the criteria outlined in Section VI of this
memorandum and the following findings:
That the granting of the variances does not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the Primary /Secondary
Residential Zone District.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
3. That the strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the setback regulations results
in a practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
development objectives of the Town Code or the Primary /Secondary Residential
Zone District.
4. That the strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive
the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same
district.
Should the Planning and Environmental Commission choose to approve the variance
requests, the following condition must be met:,
That prior to final design review approval, the applicant provides a landscape plan
which includes provisions to adequately buffer the surface parking area from
adjacent properties,
2. That the applicant submit a revocable right -of -way permit for all improvements
located in the drainage easement and right -of -way prior to submittal of the building
2
permit.
IV. REVIEWING BOARD ROLES
A_ The Planning and Environmental Commission is responsible for evaluating a
proposal for:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses
and structures in the vicinity.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility
and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity„ or to attain the
objectives of this Title without grant of special privilege.
1 The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities,
and public safety.
4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the
proposed variance.
B_ The DRIB has NO review authority on a variance, but must review any accompanying
DR
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11,
12.
B application.The DRB is responsible for evaluating the DRB proposal for:
Architectural compatibility with other structures, the land and surroundings
Fitting buildings into landscape
Configuration of building and grading of a site which respects the topography
Removal/ Preservation of trees and native vegetation
Adequate provision for snow storage on -site
Acceptability of building materials and colors
Acceptability of roof elements, eaves, overhangs, and other building forms
Provision of landscape and drainage
Provision of fencing, walls, and accessory structures
Circulation and access to a site including parking, and site distances
Location and design of satellite dishes
Provision of outdoor lighting
V. ZONING STATISTICS
Staff has reviewed the proposal according to the Primary /Secondary Zone District and the
survey submitted. The analysis provides the following:
Lot Size: 8,624.8 sq. ft. / 0.198 acres
Zoning: Primary /Secondary Residential
Hazards: none
0 3
Standard
GRFA:
Primary
EHU
Garage
Setbacks:
Front:
Sides:
Rear:
Site Coverage
Allowed
Existin
Proposed
4,803 sq. ft.
2,458 sq. ft.
3,619 sq. ft.
2,831 sq. ft_
1,631 sq_ ft_
2,723 sq. ft.
1,175 sq. ft.
827 sq. ft,
821 sq, ft.
900 sq. ft.
n/a
244 sq. ft.
20 ft_
14.4 ft.
9 ft.
15 ft. (east)
11.8 ft.
11.9 ft.
15 ft. (west)
20.5 ft.
9.5 ft.
15 ft.
59 ft.
51.5 ft.
2,156 sq. ft. (25 %`) 1,118 sq. ft. (13 %) 2,353 sq. ft. (25 %)
*Because there is a Type 1 EHU on the site, site coverage is increased to 25% of total lot area.
VI
CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
A. Consideration of Factors Regarding the Variances:
The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential
uses and structures in the vicinity.
Setbacks
As requested by the Planning and Environmental Commission at the
February 12„ 2001, meeting, the applicant has increased the setback from
the west property line to a minimum of 9.5 ft. This includes 151 sq. ft. of
GRFA and 23 sq. ft. of garage in the west side setback. Staff believes that
the increase in the setback to 9.5 ft. will allow for additional landscaping, thus
reducing the impact of the proposed addition to other structures in the
vicinity, most notably, the structure to the west.
The front setback has increased to 9 ft. This includes 113 sq. ft. of GRFA,
which encroaches approximately 5 ft. into the front setback and 101 sq. ft_
of garage. The garage encroaches 11 ft. into the front setback. Due to the
configuration of the right -of -way of this lot, staff believes that there will be
minimal impacts on existing or potential structures in the vicinity.
Parking in the right-of-wa
The proposed parking in the right -of -way encroaches up to 11 ft. into the
right -of -way, Due to the configuration of the lot and the applicant's attempt
to minimize the encroachment, staff believes that the proposed parking in the
right -of -way will have no effect on structures in the vicinity.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and
enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or
to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special privilege.
The applicant has revised the plans, minimizing the encroachment into the
front and side setbacks. By designing a one -car garage, the applicant has
•
•
L`
l9
increased the west side setback from 3 ft. to 9.5 ft. and the front setback
from 8 ft. to 9 ft. Staff does not believe this variance request to be a grant of
special privilege. The size, configuration, existing structure, and 50 ft. stream
setback are all physical hardships on this lot which greatly restrict the ability
of improvements to be made to the structure without a variance. The lot is
nonconforming with regards to lot size and the house currently encroaches
into the front and side setbacks. Many of the structures in the neighborhood
have similar encroachments into the setbacks (see below).
17J
Location
Description of the site
2923 Bellflower
Nonconforming 4 -plex approved by Eagle County.
Encroaches 9 ft. into the stream setback, 7.5 ft. into the
east setback, and encroaches into the right-of-way.
2933 Bellflower
No information available.
2943 Bellflower
Granted a front setback variance to allow for a front
setback of 13 ft. Side setbacks are nonconforming at 12
ft. and 5 ft.
2953 Bellflower
Granted a parking variance to not enclose parking in
conjunction with EHU. Meets all setback requirements.
2963 Bellflower
Granted setback variances allowing for a 6 ft. front
setback, 6.4 ft. east side setback, and 8.4 ft. side setback.
2983 Bellflower
No information available.
3003 Bellflower
Granted front setback variance to allow for a 13 ft. front
setback, with GRFA being allowed beneath the garage.
Side setback variance was denied.
2992 Bellflower
Denied (by Council) a side setback variance for garage
and GRFA. Meets all setback requirements.
2982 Bellflower
Meets all setback requirements.
2972 Bellflower
Meets all setback re uirements.
2962 Bellflower
No information available.
2852 Bellflower
Nonconforming. Encroaches into the front setback 9 ft.
and 1 ft. into side setback.
2942 Bellflower
Granted a front setback variance for a garage and storage
area to allow for a 15.5 ft. front setback. Nonconforming
with a 7 ft. encroachment into the east side setback.
2932 Bellflower
Meets all setback requirements.
2995 Basingdale
No information available.
2975 Basingdale
Meets all setback requirements.
2955 Basingdale
Garage located in front setback.
2945 Basingdale
Nonconforming. Encroaches into side setback 7 ft.
2935 Basingdale
Granted front setback variance to allow for GRFA below
garage in front setback. Below grade encroachment of
18.5 ft.
2925 Basingdale
Granted front setback variance to allow for a front setback
of 13 ft.
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public tacilities and
utilities, and public safety.
The modification to the proposal has eliminated the structure from the
5
existing 5 ft. drainage easement. The Public Works Department will accept
a revocable right -of -way permit for the improvements proposed within that
easement and for the parking in the right -of -way. Staff does not believe that
the variance will have a negative effect on the factors listed above. .
B. The Planning and Environmental Commission shall make the following findings
before granting a variance:
That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same
district.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons:
a. The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified
regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical
hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title.
b. There are exceptions or extraordinary circumstances or conditions
applicable to the same site of the variance that do not apply generally
to other properties in the same zone.
C. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation
would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of
other properties in the same district.
9
L'
•
•
•
L.L
a�
co
f �
W..9
L
(D
-4--m A-
(D
Li.
rr�
i
4d
c
0
m
C
RS
U
R
.
R9
`3
N
C
O
1
i
4<::�lZ
r A
i .�. n9,�x l 4 Y�4 ✓ A �' S g S N G
R
�A " ,a3Y] ; C� ;• i i a y yj z } 6 ra.
P4
i.
,
l
(f s �B' W L U
IL
Ir li1 A
•
•
t:
•
I
4 1
o
m
A —
A
(L
%5
z
•
l
Q 0 CJ
ro
26A 2 AIL..
- - -,
I
4.
I
4 1
o
m
A —
A
(L
%5
z
•
e "�6 5 k rYt¢ 7 o g o � c� {y !
W 0
0 a
��f,��iGF�76RE�e��yn d �'N 'C n ��y� �p � � � � t c 4 � { � } `s. F a� ' j
W •
.�
P-4
'4N
,:aK LL
i if
r 4z
4 z
1A t
- -------- - ------------- -
7i ------------------
LU rd ii
4u
T'11
ti
•
•
•
•
0
dA
Uf I
Si
;J t, 14. a
MA N. w
I lei fr w z Fi+ vv 1 1 , w > & 0
IF I
1 $ 1 .
N 11� 4
-4
LL
IJA
1. -------- C)
x I
.V.-
• L_ I
y
li
JY
Q3
� a-.w I` .o - a•.e I
o
saauaYSa uivan A•.9
w. _ f
! - 1
� 1
� e
' ' f � }eoai3•. .o�.v � r
1
l
1
i
i
a ------------ - - - -
tlrsa Da NLaG CMnc9 1
9 _ _ l�lvRAa14
_ � � � y.0• JT�LITY fld5E1•R`N` _ _ _ - r
I L L
Z
•
•
•
e S
pe
�'SX �PY'�
t
i .
a
m �
}
� 6
g
F•s J
P4
�
01
fip�X� s� �� M
I
L.
�
f
i"
if
rii Q
O
� LL
P-4
y
li
JY
Q3
� a-.w I` .o - a•.e I
o
saauaYSa uivan A•.9
w. _ f
! - 1
� 1
� e
' ' f � }eoai3•. .o�.v � r
1
l
1
i
i
a ------------ - - - -
tlrsa Da NLaG CMnc9 1
9 _ _ l�lvRAa14
_ � � � y.0• JT�LITY fld5E1•R`N` _ _ _ - r
I L L
Z
•
•
•
� •
9 a
11 .
, ,
t
1
ag
ag 11
'-)'I
Z
MIME. - flis
I •1
f,
i 1
----------- ----------
Jj
P
5 ul-
04 P64
03
IL
41 P-A
— ----------------
A
I
f Y-
LL
----------- ----------
Jj
A
I
f Y-
LL
J'A l
• |] •
,|
p
_
t
§� |�
k
| |
|■
,
q
! -
-
..
i
4
'
�
| I
|
i
�
-
�
�
}
m
\�/
J
J«uu
.�,4
- - --
7.
IL
�
.
�
`\
0
�
0
0
E
0
�
�
�
�
r
�
�
i
,
01
m
•
�
�
�
�
r
�
�
i
,
E!� 1ti�7 4
.�E
y P l y i•' K � W K V SaK
t��air6���tiaf�.�� . 3 3 � � �� � � � r 3 � y I [ w +�', I►S.�.UI f
! S
I I
t
p 4
1 � .i•i�
I 1 I 11
I I
IF]
4
tu
, I
/
•
•
L
r:
•
•
a Pc c it f — PC S [
A
4 rYj Y L L a.7 lu Yp V a ( ir e
' in
s Ij`�' ! I Q � w 3aRk� S
8 f J� a e
l:J
I �
P
Z
�I O
_ -id• �
1 i
d
T
�Fl
TM
�l
,. I
MAR -21 -2001 17:50 FRON:BRAUN ASSOCIATES 9709267576 TO:9704792452 P.002/003
IBAIAB RAL IN ASSOIC`➢,ATLS, INC.
PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
March 21, 2001
Planning and Environmental Commission
Town of Vail
75 S, Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Alan Pctc rs Variance Application — 2955 Bellflower Drive/Lot 6, Block 6, Vail intermountain
Dear Commission Members
Thank you for allowing us an opportunity to hear your concerns about Mr- Peters plans for redevelopment
of his home in West Vail. Based on the Commission's comment,; we have revised the plans to reflect
direction given by the PEC at your February 12, 2001 hcaring-
3clow is a summary of your comments and direction and how we have addressed those issues:
Our previous application requested a 3' side setback on the west side of the lot. The PEC
believed that this was too little setback and did not allow for adequate 4eparation from the
neighboring residence. We have reduced the scope of the improvement on that portion of the
home and have modified the plans to include a one -ear garage where a three -car garage was
previously proposed. The plans were presented to the neighbor and he found the revised plans
acceptable. The revised plan provides s minimum of 10' side setback-
Our previous application requested an 9' front setback. The PEC agi that the proposed front
setback for both the garage and the floor area above was adequate based on the substantial
setback to the edge of street pavement. The PEC agreed that the proposed setback was
consistent with other homes along this street and consistent with other variances granted in the
neighborhood- The revised plan provides a 9.5' front setback or 31' to the edge of :street
pavement,
+ The cast Side setback request of 11.5' remains unchanged from the previous application. This
request maintains the side setback of' existing home. The PEC expressed no concerns about
this request at the last meeting;. The PEC also expressed no concerns regarding the front entry
audition to the home, which enerciaches into the front setback with GR.FA on the second levicl.
Edwards Village Cemer. Suitt C -209 Ph. - 970.926.7575
o I a5 Edwards Village Boulevard Fax - 970.926.7576 10
Pbst C »ce Box 2658 www.br
Edwards, Colorado 81632
h1AR -21 -2001 17:50 FROM :BRAUN ASSOCIATES 9709267576 'Z - TO: 9704792452 P.003/003
+ The request f.or parking in the right --of -way remains the same as the previous application with
two parking spaces overhanging the front property line_ The PFC gen rally agrTecd that this
variance was warranted as the parking spaces were located a distance of 11' from the edge of
street pavement_
We believe the proposed modifications reflect the direction given by the PEC and address all of the
concerns of the PEC. We alga believe that the proposed home is consistent with other residences and
var antes granted in the neighborhood and throughout the Town. We hope that you agree and that you
will approve the variances as proposed_
. fT
Dominic Ml aur ello,
•
•
2
BAIIABRAUN ASSOCIATES, NC.
PLANN[NG and COMMUNIT - Y DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Braun Associates, Inc. on behalf of Allan Peters
DATE: January 22, 2001
SUBJECT: Variance requests necessary to renovate existing home, located at 2955
Bellflower DrAot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Subdivision.
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
Mr. Peters, the owner of the above referenced property, is seeking the following variances in
order to provide an enclosed garage, additional GRFA, and substantially improve the function
and appearance of his home. His requests include:
• A front yard setback variance to allow the garage and GRFA to encroach from
approximately 3' to 8' in the front setback.
This variance is necessary to construct a garage and additional living area on the
property. While the variance would place the garage and portions of the living area
within the front setback, the closest the structure will be to the edge of the street asphalt
is 30'. The property line an this property as platted jogs to the north. Bellflower Drive, as
constructed, did not jog to the north at this location and therefore is located 23' from the
property line in the worst case. This variance would place this home in a location
consistent with the location of other structures in the neighborhood and is consistent with
other variances granted on this street and throughout the neighborhood- This variance is
warranted due to the small size and configuration of the lot, location of the existing
structure, topographic conditions, and in order to achieve consistency and fairness with
other similar sites in the neighborhood and throughout the Town.
• Side yard setback variances to allow a garage, GRFA, on -grade stairs, and deck to
encroach approximately 15' to 5' in the side setback.
These variances are also necessary to construct a garage and additional living area on
the property and allow for adequate access to the EHU. The actual structure will not be
closer that 4' from the side property line, in the worst case. The impact of the on -grade
stairs on the neighboring property is negligible due to the fact that the stairs are being
placed on -grade and are adjacent to the parking area for the house to the west. The
GRFA encroachment on the east side of the house is a logical extension of the home to
Edwards Village Center, Suite C -209 Ph. - 970.926.7575
0105 Edwards Village Boulevard Fax - 970:926.7576
Post Office Box 265$ www.hraunassociates.com
Edwards, Colorado 81632
the north and represents approximately 6 sq. ft. of GRFA. These variances are
warranted due to the narrowness of the site, topography of the site, the presence of Gore
Creek, and the presence of the existing structure on the property, which create a
hardship and make it impractical to construct reasonable additions to this home without a
variance.
• A parking variance to allow two parking spaces to be partially located within the
right -of -way.
This variance is necessary due to the location of the garage relative to the existing
structure, the topography of the lot, and the close proximity of Gore Creek to the north.
The configuration of the Town's right -of -way relative to the placement of the street
pavement also creates a peculiar hiatus between this home and the street. This
variance is warranted due to the presence of the existing structure on the property,
topography of the site, and the presence of the Gore Creek, which create a hardship and
make it impractical to make additions to this home without such a variance.
BACKGROUND
This home was originally constructed under the jurisdiction of Eagle County. This lot, like most
(if not all) others in this neighborhood, and many others throughout the Town of Vail has been
made nonconforming through the annexation and application of zoning regulations by the Town
of Vail. Lots in this neighborhood and on this street are very small; this lot is 0.198 acres or
8,624.88 sq. ft. The existing home encroaches into setbacks. The existing home is located
• 11.8' from the east property line, 14' from the front property line (south), and an existing wood
deck is located 1.5' from the west property line.
There is an existing secondary unit on the property. The secondary unit on this property is
currently not deed restricted as an Employee Housing Unit, but as part of this proposal it will be
deed restricted in accordance with Town Code. One of the major benefits of this renovation
proposal is that the Town will be adding an Employee Housing Unit to its inventory and that the
owner is planning to upgrade the size and quality of the EHU making it a very attractive
employee unit. The EHU is proposed to be quite large with an ample amount of storage space
and an enclosed parking space. The existing home, like the neighbor homes, is quite old and is
in need of renovation.
The parking situation on this lot, and in the neighborhood generally, is strained at best. This
proposal creates a three -car garage and parking for 5 vehicles total. The proposal alleviates all
of the parking problems existing on this lot and generally improves the function and aesthetics of
the neighborhood.
There have been many similar variances granted for homes in this neighborhood and throughout
the Town of Vail on lots of less than 15,000 sq. ft. (especially where the request involved
providing a garage). Many setback variance requests have been granted for construction on
small vacant lots. Attached to this memo, as "Exhibit A" is a list of similar variances granted by
the PEC.
•
Peters, Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Page 2 of 6
Braun Associates, Inc.
II. OUR REQUEST
We request that the PEC grant approval of the proposed variances subject to the following
findings:
That the granting of the setback variance does not constitute a grant of special
privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the
Primary /Secondary Zone District.
2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the
vicinity.
The strict literal interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would
result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the
objectives of this title.
4. The strict interpretation or enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive
the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same
district.
Ill. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS
A. Consideration of Factors Regarding the Setback and Parking Variances:
I . The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or
potential uses and structures in the vicinity.
The proposed variances are consistent with the existing: character of the
area, the existing structures in the area, and other variances granted
under similar circumstances in the area and throughout the Town. The
proposed improvements will improve the appearance and functionality of
the site. The site will be upgraded to comply with existing building and fire
codes as well as comply with current design requirements for the
neighborhood.
2. The degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation
and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve
compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity
or to attain the objectives of this title without a grant of special
privilege.
The granting of these variances is consistent with those approved for
simi #arty situated properties in the Town. The proposed variances are the
minimum necessary to achieve compatibility with other sites and
structures in the neighborhood. No special privilege will be granted with
this approval as shown by the numerous other instances of variances
being granted for similar projects as well as the existence of other
•
Peters, Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Page 3 of 6
Braun Associates, Inc.
•
structures in the neighbor that enjoy similar setbacks and parking
conditions.
3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of
population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and
utilities, and public safety.
The proposal will improve the parking accessibility and availability on this
lot and will improve the overall functionality of the neighborhood by having
vehicles parked in facilities designed and consistent with the Town's
Development Standards Handbook. The proposal will have little, if any,
impact light and air in the neighborhood.
•
•
Peters, Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain
Braun Associates, Inc.
Page 4 of 6
Exhibit A
This is a list of variances granted over the past several years for similarly situated properties
throughout the Town of Vail. This list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of variance
requests, but rather represents 2 or 3 hours of research of the Town's files.
Huerta Residence, 3003 Bellflower Drive (June 28. 1999):
The PEC approved a variance allowing GRFA in the front setback on a vacant lot. A front yard
setback encroachment of 8' was approved.
Vlaar Residence, 2963 Bellflower Drive (October 26, 1992):
The PEC approved a front yard setback variance and a density variance to allow for a GRFA
addition to the home (no garage was part of the request). The approval allowed an
encroachment into the front setback of 14'.
Beck Residence, Bellflower Drive, Lot 2, Block 6, Vail Intermountain (August 14. 1989):
The PEC approved a side yard setback variance and a stream setback variance to allow the
construction of a deck. The existing home encroaches 9' into the stream setback and 7.5 into
the side setback. The deck encroachment was in addition to these encroachments.
Hilb(Cummincls Residence, 2338 Garmish Drive (May, 20 1996);
The PEC approved a front yard setback variance to allow GRFA to encroach 20' into the front
setback (on the property line) and a parking variance to allow parking to be iocated in the Town's
right -of -way.
Watkins Residence, 1799 Sierra Trail (April 8, 1996):
The PEC approved a variance to allow parking located within the Town's right -of -way. The
proposed garage had a zero front yard setback.
Phillips Residence 2696 Davos Trail (July 12 1999):
The PEC approved GRFA in the front setback below a garage. GRFA was allowed a 1' setback.
Bresnahan Residence, 4532 5trearnside Circle East (December 16 1996)
The PEC granted a side yard setback variance to allow the addition of a garage. The garage
encroached 10' into the side setback
Current Residence, 3235 Katso Ranch Road (November 11. 1996):
The PEC approved a front yard setback variance for a garage addition. The variance allowed
for a 16' front setback..
•
Peters Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Page 5 of 6
Braun Associates, Inc.
Drisko Residence, 325 Forest Road (February 12. 1996)=
The PEC approved a front yard setback variance for a two -story garage on a new primary
residence. The front yard setback encroachment was approved at 19.5' (or a 6" setback).
Venners Residence, 4196 Columbine Drive June 10 1996):
The PEC approved a side yard setback variance to allow a garage addition. The garage was
allowed to encroach 7.5' into the side yard setback.
A iesworth Residence 2586 Davos Trail (September S. 1997
The PEC approved site coverage and side setback variances to allow for the construction of a
garage addition to the existing residence.
Lashovitz Residence 1748 Sierra Trail (July 1997):
The PEC approved site coverage and side setback variances to allow for the construction of a
garage addition to the existing residence.
Taylor Residence 2409 Chamonix Road (May 1993):.
The PEG approved a variance to construct the garage in the front setback (the average slope on
this lot did not exceed 30 %). The PEC also approved a site coverage variance in order to
construct a garage and building connection on the property.
Smail Residence, 4238 Nugget Lane (September 1992):
The PEC approved side and front yard setback variances in order to construct a garage and a
GRFA addition.
Testwuide Residence 898 Red Sandstone Circle (August 1992):
The PEC approved side and front yard setback variances in order to construct a garage addition
to the existing residence.
Strauss Residence, Lot 47, Vail Village West Filing No. 2 (1985):
The PEC approved a front yard setback variance and a site coverage variance in order to
construct a new garage. The garage was approved to be located 15' from the front property line.
•
Peters, Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain Page 6 of 6
Braun Associates, Inc.
1
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a conditional use permit amending an existing conditional use
permit, to allow for one additional Fractional Fee Club unit, located at Vail
Mountain Lodge, 352 E. Meadow Drive /Part of Tract B, Vail Village 1" Filing.
Applicant: Ron Byrne, d.b_a. VML, L.L.C., represented by Braun Associates
Planner: George Ruther
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The applicant, Ron Byrne, represented by Braun Associates, is requesting an amendment to an
existing conditional use permit that allows for the operation of a fractional fee club within the Vail
Mountain Lodge. The existing permit allows for eight fractional fee club units to be operated in
the Lodge. The applicant is requesting to eliminate three approved accommodation units and
construction of one additional fractional fee club unit in its place. This change will revise the
approved plans for the building and create 27 accommodation units and 8 fractional fee club
units in the Lodge. The Vail Mountain Lodge (formerly dba Vail Athletic Club & Spa) is located at
352 East Meadow Drive at the intersection of East Meadow Drive and Vail Valley Drive.
The proposed improvements of the Vail Mountain Lodge continue to include a major renovation
and upgrading of the existing building along with several exterior additions to the existing
structure. The new exterior additions are generally located on the south, west and north sides
of the building. Due to the configuration and design of the existing structure, the majority of the
new square footage that is being added is atop the existing building foundation and is in the
form of infill development. The applicant continues to propose to redevelop the existing hotel in
accordance with the development standards prescribed for the Public Accommodation Zone
District. Since the proposal has been approved, the previous Special Development District
designation has been abandoned. The major elements of the redevelopment proposal remain:
The complete renovation of the exterior of the building. The renovation introduces a new
architectural style for the building. The proposed improvements to the exterior include a
combination of stone, wood siding, stucco and timbers. The new architectural style is more
in keeping with the goals of the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Considerations.
A complete remodel of the interior of the hotel. The remodel to the interior includes a newly
designed restaurant and bar, lobby, front desk, health club and meeting space.
Modifications to the existing accommodation units (20). The creation of a fractional fee club
operation. The proposed club will now include a total of eight new fractional fee club units.
The size of the club units varying between two and three bedroom units.
A
TOWN OFYAR
Operation of the club will be in accordance with the provisions outlined in Chapter 16 of the
Zoning Regulations.
• The addition of two new free - market, for -sale condominiums. The new condominiums will
be located on the top floor of the hotel- There are two dwelling units existing in the hotel.
• The construction of one new on -site employee housing unit. The new unit will be in addition
to the four units already on -site. As a result of the proposed remodel each of the existing
employee units will be remodeled and upgraded. The on -site units will provide deed -
resthcted housing for up to ten employees.
• The implementation of the suggested streetscape improvements along Vail Valley Drive and
East Meadow Drive.
II. STAFF RECO'MMENDATiON
The Community Development Department recommends approval of the applicant's request for
an amended conditional use permit to allow for the addition of one new fractional fee club unit in
the Vail Mountain Lodge, located at 352 East Meadow Drive. Staff s recommendation of
approval is based upon the review of the criteria outlined in Sections V & VI of this
memorandum.
Should the Planning & Environmental Commission choose to approve the conditional use permit
request, staff would recommend that the Commission make the following findings,
"That the conditional use permit request complies with the criteria as outlined in Section
Vi of this memorandum."
•
III. BACKGROUND
November 1993 - The Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 27, Series of 1993,
establishing Special Development District No. 30, Vail Athletic Club. The establishment of
Special Development District No. 30 allowed for up to 52 accommodation units, 4 dwelling units
and 4 employee housing units. The total allowable GRFA was 32,282 square feet with an
additional 17,.000 square feet permitted for restaurant, club, lobby, etc. The underlying zoning
for the property is Public Accommodation
January 1996 - The Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 2, Series of 1996, amending
the Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 30. The amending
ordinance increased the number of allowable accommodation units to 55 and increased
allowable GRFA to 34,505 square feet. There was no change to the number of dwelling units or
employee housing units.
March 1997 — The Planning & Environmental Commission approved a minor amendment to
Special Development District No. 30. The minor amendment allowed for modifications to the
parking garage, restaurant, common areas and the balconies and decks of the accommodation
and dwelling units.
May 4 1999 - The Vail Town Council denied Ordinance No. 12, Series of 1999, amending the
Approved Development Plan for Special Development District No. 30. Had it been approved,
the amending ordinance would have permitted an a reduction in the number of accommodation
2
units from 54 to 46 and increased the number of dwelling units back to four as originally
approved.
October 1999 — The Vail Town Council approved Ordinance No. 23, Series of 1999, amending
the prescribed development standards for the Public Accommodation Zone District and
establishing a revised development review process. The approved amendments, in part,
increased allowable GRFA to 150% of the site area, increased site coverage from 55% to 65 %,
eliminated AU's /EHU's /FFU's from the density calculation, and changed the definition of a
"lodge ". The building height, landscape and parking requirements remained unchanged.
March 2000 — The Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission approved a major
exterior alteration and conditional use permit to allow for the redevelopment of the Vail Athletic
Club. The approval allowed for the construction of 30 accommodation units, seven fractional
fee club units, five employee housing units, and four condominiums units.
Vail Village Master Plan
Goals for Vail Village are summarized in six major goal statements. The goal statements are
designed to establish a framework, or direction, for future development of the Village_ The
goals, along with the established objectives and policies are to be used in evaluating a proposal
during the development review process. The following goals, objectives and policies have been
identified:
Goal #1 Encourage high quality redevelopment while preserving the unique
architectural scale of the Village in order to sustain its sense of
community and identity.
1.1 Objective: Implement a consistent Development Review Process to
reinforce the character of the Village.
1.1.1 Policy: Development and improvement projects approved
in the Village shall be consistent with the goals,
objectives, policies and design considerations as
outlined in the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban
Design Guide Plan.
1.2 Objective: Encourage the upgrading and redevelopment of residential
and commercial facilities.
1.2.1 Policy: Additional development may be allowed as
identified by the action plan as is consistent with
the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design
Guide Plan.
1.3 Objective Enhance new development and redevelopment through
public improvements done by private developers working
in cooperation with the Town.
0 3
_1.31 Policy: Public improvements shall be developed with the
participation of the private sector working with the
Town. 40
Goal #2 To foster a strong tourist industry and promote year -round
economic health and viability for the Village and for the community
as a whole.
2.1 Objective: Recognize the variety of land uses found in the 10 sub-
areas throughout the Village and allow for development
that is compatible with these established land use patterns.
2. 1.1 Policy: The zoning code and development review criteria
shall be consistent with the overall goals and
objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan.
2.3 Objective: Increase the number of residential units available for short-
term, overnight accommodations.
2.3.1 Policy: The development of short-term accommodation
units is strongly encouraged_ Residential units that
are developed above existing density levels are
required to be designed or managed in a manner
that makes them available for short -term overnight
rental,
2.4 Objective: Encourage the development of a variety of new
commercial activity where compatible with existing land
uses.
2.4.1 Policy. Commercial infill development consistent with
established horizontal zoning regulations shall be
encouraged to provide activity generators,
accessible greenspaces, public plazas, and
streetscape improvements to the pedestrian
network throughout the Village.
2.5 Obiective: Encourage the continued upgrading, renovation and
maintenance of existing lodging and commercial facilities
to better serve the needs of our guests.
2.5.1 Policy: Recreation amenities, common areas, meeting
facilities and other amenities shall be preserved
and enhanced as a part of any redevelopment of
lodging properties.
2.5.2 Policy: The Town will use the maximum flexibility possible
in the interpretation of building and fire codes in
order to facilitate building renovations without
4 0
compromising life, health and safety
considerations.
2.6 Ob ective Encourage the development of affordable housing units
through the efforts of the private sector.
2.6.2 Policy: Employee housing shall be developed with
appropriate restrictions so as to insure their
availability and affordability to the local work force.
2.6,3 Policy: The Town of Vail may facilitate in the development
of affordable housing by providing limited
assistance_
Goal #3 To recognize as a top priority the enhancement of the walking
experience throughout the Village.
3.1 Obiective: Physically improve the existing pedestrian ways by
landscaping and other improvements.
3 . 1 1 .1 Policy: Private development projects shall incorporate
streetscape improvements (such as paver
treatments, landscaping, lighting and seating
areas), along adjacent pedestrian ways.
4D 3.1.2 Policy: Public art shall be encouraged at appropriate
locations throughout the Town.
3.1.3 Policy: Flowers, trees, water features and other
landscaping shall be encouraged throughout the
Town in locations adjacent to, or visible from, public
areas.
32 Objective: Minimize the amount of vehicular traffic in the Village to the
greatest extent possible.
3-2.1 Policy: Vehicular traffic will be eliminated or reduced to
absolutely minimal necessary levels in the
pedestrianized areas of the Village.
3.3 Objective: Encourage a wide variety of activities, events and street
life along pedestrian ways and plazas.
3.3.2 Policy: Outdoor dining is an important streetscape feature
and shall be encouraged in commercial infill or
redevelopment projects.
3.4 Obiective: Develop additional sidewalks, pedestrian -only walkways
and accessible green space areas, including pocket parks
and stream access.
5
3.4.1 Policy: Physical improvements to property adjacent to
stream tracts shall not further restrict public access.
3.4.2 Policy: Private development projects shall be required to
incorporate new sidewalks along streets adjacent to
the project as designated in the Vail Village Master
Plan and /or Recreation Trails Master Plan.
Goal #4 To preserve existing open space areas and expand green space
opportunities.
4.1 Obiective: Improve existing open space areas and create new plazas
with green space and pocket parks. Recognize the
different roles of each type of open space in forming the
overall fabric of the Village.
4.1.3 Policy: With the exception of ski base - related facilities,
existing natural open space areas at the base of
Vail Mountain and throughout Vail Village shall be
preserved as open space.
Goal #5 Increase and improve the capacity, efficiency and aesthetics of the
transportation and circulation system throughout the Village.
5.1 Objective: Meet parking demands with public and private parking
facilities. 0
5.1.1 Policy: For new development that is located outside of the
Commercial Gore 1 Zone District, on -site parking
shall be provided (rather than paying into the
parking fund) to meet any additional parking
demand as required by the Zoning Code.
5.1.5 Policy: Redevelopment projects shall be strongly
encouraged to provide underground or visually
concealed parking.
5.2 Obiective: Encourage the use of public transportation to minimize the
use of private automobiles throughout Vail.
5.2.2 Policy: The Town shall facilitate and encourage the
operation of private shuttle vans outside of the
pedestrianized core area.
5.3 Objective: Concentrate the majority of interconnecting transit activity
at the periphery of the Village to minimize vehicular traffic
in pedestrianized areas.
6 •
Goal #6 To insure the continued improvement of the vital operational
elements of the Village.
6.1 Objective: Provide service and delivery facilities for existing and new
development.
6.2 Obiective: Provide for the safe and efficient functions of fire, police
and public utilities within the context of an aesthetically
pleasing resort setting,
6.2.1 Policy: Development projects and other improvements in
Vail Village shall be reviewed by respective Town
departments to identify both the impacts of the
proposal and potential mitigating measures.
•
•
6.2,2 Policy: Minor improvements (landscaping, decorative
paving, open dining decks, etc.), may be permitted
on Town of Vail land or right -of -way (with review
and approval by the Town Council and Planning
and Environmental Commission when applicable)
provided that Town operations such as snow
removal, street maintenance and fire department
access and operation are able to be maintained at
current levels, Special design (i.e heated
pavement), maintenance fees, or other
considerations may be required to offset impacts on
Town services.
IV. PROS AND CONS
Benefits
• Provides an increase in the number of short -term accommodations in the Town of Vail
• Improves and redevelops an older building in the Town of Vail
• The project complies with the Town of Vail Land Use Plan
• The recommended streetscape improvements will be implemented
• An increased occupancy potential due to the operation of the fractional fee club
• The construction of up to two new employee beds in the Village
• The redevelopment of an existing building that currently does not comply with many of the
development objectives of the Vail Village Master Plan and Urban Design Considerations
• The elimination of a Special Development District
Negatives
• The loss of meeting room space in Vail
• The loss of health club square footage and other similar amenities
• The loss of several existing trees
• Eliminates three potential accommodation units
7
V. ZONING ANALYSIS
Public Accommodation Zone District
The following development standards apply to this request:
USES
The only permitted uses in the zone district are "lodges ". A lodge is defined as a building
designed for temporary lodging of individuals or families in which the GRFA devoted to
accommodation units or fractional fee club units is equal to or greater than 70% of the total
GRFA.
As a result of the proposed redevelopment, 67% of the total GRFA will be devoted to
accommodation units and fractional fee club units. This figure includes a total of 27
accommodation units and eight fractional fee club units. While this figure remains non-
conforming, the proposal represents a significant increase in the amount of total GRFA devoted
to accommodation unit and fractional fee club unit square footage on the property. However, in
accordance with the recently adopted !language for the zone district, more than 70% of the
"new" GRFA resulting from this proposal is devoted to accommodation units or fractional fee
club units. Therefore, the proposal complies with the provisions of the Public Accommodation
zone district with regard to uses and GRFA.
DENSITY CONTROL
Pursuant to the Zoning Regulations, up to one hundred and fifty (150) square feet of gross
residential floor area (GRFA) may be permitted for each one hundred (100) square feet of
buildable site area. The final determination of allowable gross residential floor area shall be
made by the Planning & Environmental Commission in accordance with Section 12- 7A -12:
Exterior Alterations or Modifications. Specifically, in determining allowable gross residential
floor area the Planning & Environmental Commission shall make a finding that proposed gross
residential floor area is in conformance with applicable elements of the Vail Village Urban
Design Guide Plan and the Urban Design Considerations. Total density shall not exceed twenty
five (25) dwelling units per acre of buildable site area. For the purposes of calculating density,
employee housing units, accommodation units and fractional fee club units shall not be counted
towards density,
Staff has reviewed the redevelopment proposal for compliance with the density control
regulations. The overall density of the property will be 5.9 dwelling units per acre (4 du's X 1.46
acres). The maximum allowable density is 25 dwelling units per acre_
There is approximately 21,000 square feet of GRFA (70 %) in the existing building. This
includes square footage devoted to AU's, DU's and EHU's. If approved, the GRFA square
footage would increase to 39,935 square feet (131 %). The proposed square footage includes
the 27 accommodation units, 8 fractional fee club units, 4 dwelling units and 5 employee
housing units.
Most importantly, of the additional square footage (18,345 sq. ft.) being added, 70.1% (12,851
sq. ft.) is devoted to accommodation units and fractional fee club units and the remaining 29.9%
(5,494 sq. ft.) is devoted to the 4 dwelling units. The numbers are exclusive of the EHU square
footage in the building, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 12 -13, Vail Town Code
According to the staff analysis, the proposal fully complies with the density control regulations. #
HEIGHT
No change proposed,
0
SITE COVERAGE
. No change.
LANDSCAPING AND SITE DEVELOPMENT
No change..
PARKING AND LOADING
Off - street parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 10 of the Zoning
Regulations. At least seventy five percent (75 %) of the required parking shall be located within
the main building or buildings and hidden from public view. No at grade or above grade surface
parking or loading area shall be located in any required front setback area. Below grade
underground structured parking and short -term guest loading and drop -off shall be permitted in
the required front setback subject to the approval of the Planning & Environmental Commission
and/or the Design Review Board.
Staff has reviewed the proposed off- street parking and loading for the Vail Mountain Lodge to
insure compliance with the prescribed regulations. According to the staff analysis, the
applicant's proposal fully complies with the regulations.
Over the years parking variances have been granted for the Vail Mountain Lodge. The
variances were approved by the Town of Vail Planning & Environmental Commission in
accordance with the provisions of the Town Code. Due to the granting of the parking variances
a legal, non - conforming situation has resulted. For purposes of this analysis, the parking
requirement has been evaluated based upon the existing and approved parking situation.
There are 22 valet parking spaces an the site today. As a result of the proposed changes to the
building there would be a net decrease in the parking requirement of 7.4 parking spaces. The
elimination of 2,548 square feet of meeting room space ( -21 spaces) and the conversion of 7
hotel dwelling units ( -14 spaces) to accommodation units significantly contributes to the net
reduction. The result is an overall reduction in the parking requirement for the site. However,
since much of the parking requirement has been addressed as a result of the granting of
parking variances in the past, there will be no loss of parking on the site. The applicant has
proposed to provide space for a short -term guest loading and drop -off at the new front entry.
The loading and delivery area will continue to be located at the west of the building. No loading
and delivery will be permitted from Vail Valley Drive.
Overall, staff believes that the applicant's proposal fully complies with the parking and loading
requirements.
MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS
The applicant is proposing to provide five deed - restricted employee housing units in the hotel.
A total of 1,475 square feet of GRFA will be used to construct the units. This is an increase of
one unit and 209 square feet of deed - restricted space over what is existing today. In
determining compliance with this criteria staff completed an Employee Housing Generation
Analysis to determine the incremental number of new employees that may be generated as a
result of the hotel redevelopment. The results of our analysis are listed below:
Employee Generation Analysis
a) Health Club = 18,552 sq. ft_ @(1.25/1000 sq. ft.) =23.2 employees
b) Restaurant/Bar = 2,372 sq. ft. @(6.5 /1000 sq. ft.) =15.4 employees
9
C) Lodging
= 37 units @(1.40 /unit) = 37 employees
d) Multi - Family (DU) = 4 units @(.4 /unit) =1.6 employees
Total Employees = 77.2 employees
(- 68 existing employees) = 68 employees
(X 0.30 multiplier) = 3 "new" employees
There is no change to the employee generation requirement.
VI. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Upon review of Chapter 16 of the Zoning Regulations, the Community Development Department
recommends approval of the request for a conditional use permit to allow for the operation of a
fractional fee club within the Vail Mountain Lodge based upon the following factors:
A. Consideration of Factors:
Before acting on a conditional use permit application, the Planning and Environmental
Commission (PEC) shall consider the factors with respect to the proposed use:
1. Relationship and impact of the use on development objectives of the
Town.
In January of 1997, the Vail Town Council adopted Ordinance No. 22,
Series of 1996.. In part, this ordinance amended the Public
Accommodation Zone District allowing fractional fee clubs as a
conditional use and set forth criteria for the Commission to consider when
evaluating such a request. Since that time, the Austria Haus Club
redevelopment project has been completed and the Gore Creek Club has
been approved by the Town. The Austria Haus contains 28 fractional fee
club units and the Gore Creek Club has been approved to construct 66
units.
The applicant is requesting the issuance of a conditional use permit to
allow for the operation of a fractional fee club within the Vail Mountain
Lodge. The proposed club would be comprised of 8 two and three
bedroom club units. These units would range in size from 1,154 square
to 1,873 square feet. The average club unit size is approximately 1,504
square feet in size. According to the applicant, the ownership of the club
units will meet the minimum requirements of fractional fee club units in
terms of intervals. The minimum requirements are has no fewer than 6
owners and no more than 12 owners whose use is established through a
reservation system. To accommodate this change, the applicant is
proposing to eliminate three accommodation units.
Through the adoption of Ordinance No. 22, Series of 1996, the Town
further recognized the need for lodging alternatives for our guests and
visitors. In passing the ordinance, the Town Council found that quality
fractional fee clubs are an appropriate means of increasing occupancy
rates, maintaining and enhancing short -term rental availability and
diversifying the resort lodging market product within the Town of Vail.
Equally as important, the Council believed that fractional flee clubs were
f.J
•
•
10
simply another of many forms of public accommodations. It has been a
long held belief that in order for the Town to remain competitive and on
the leading edge of resort development, alternative lodging opportunities
must be created and creative financing vehicles for hotel redevelopment
must be implemented.
Staff believes that the conditional use permit for a fractional fee club
within the Vail Mountain Lodge will be beneficial to the Town and will
have a positive impact on the development objectives of the Community.
2. The effect of the use on light and air, distribution of population,
transportation facilities, utilities, schools, parks and recreation
facilities, and other public facilities needs.
As there is no substantive change to the exterior or the occupancy loads
of the building, staff believes that this review criteria is not relevant to this
request.
3. Effect upon traffic with particular reference to congestion,
automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and
control, access, maneuverability, and removal of snow from the
street and parking areas.
There is a positive impact on the parking requirement of the Vail Mountain
Lodge if this proposal is approved. The Vail Mountain Lodge is located in
40 the Commercial Core Barking Area of Vail Village. As such, the parking
requirement for fractional fee club units and accommodation units is 0.7
spaces /unit. In the case of this proposal, the total parking requirement of
the lodge is reduced by 1.4 spaces (3 Au's vs 1 FFt1). The Vail Mountain
Lodge is currently non - conforming with regard to total number of parking
spaces. This application further reduces the non - conformity.
4. Effect upon the character of the area in which the proposed use is to
be located, including the scale and bulk of the proposed use in
relation to surrounding uses.
As there is no substantive change to the exterior or the occupancy loads
of the building, staff believes that this review criteria is not relevant to this
request.
5. Prior to the approval of a conditional use permit for a time -share
estate, fractional fee, fractional fee club, or time -share license
proposal, the following shall be considered:
a. If the proposal for a fractional fee club is a redevelopment of
an existing facility, the fractional fee club shall maintain an
equivalency of accommodation units as presently existing.
Equivalency shall be maintained either by an equal number of
units or by square footage. If the proposal is a new
development, it shall provide at least as much
accommodation unit GRFA as fractional fee club unit GRFA.
The Vail Mountain Lodge is a redevelopment of an existing hotel. The
proposed hotel shall be required to maintain an equivalency of the
11
presently existing number of accommodation units. The applicant is
proposing to meet the equivalency requirement by replacing a greater of
accommodation units. According to information on file in the Community
Development Department, 20 accommodation units exist today. The
applicant is proposing to replace and/or remodel the existing units with 27
new hotel rooms totaling approximately 12,851 square feet.
b. Lock -off units and lock -off unit square footage shall not be
included in the calculation when determining the equivalency
of existing accommodation units or equivalency of existing
square footage.
No lock -off units are proposed.
C. The ability of the proposed project to create and maintain a
high level of occupancy.
The fractional fee club component of the Vail Mountain Lodge proposal is
intended to provide additional hotel and "hotel- type" accommodation units
in the Town of Vail. The applicant is proposing to incorporate 8 member -
owned club units (fractional fee club units), with 27 new accommodation
(hotel) rooms. Although not in the present design, staff believes that
lock -off units provide an additional community benefit of added "pillows ".
If a fractional fee club unit owner purchases an interest in a multiple
bedroom unit, and does not desire to utilize all the bedrooms, they can
then have the opportunity of returning the unused bedrooms (lock -offs) to
a rental program.
Staff feels that by providing lock -off units and managing the availability of
the lock -off units in a rental program when not in use, a fractional fee
club project can significantly increase the availability of accommodation
units in the Town of Vail. Staff would recommend that the applicant
provide "lock -off' opportunities into the design of the fractional fee club
units.
Through our research on the fractional fee issue back in 1996, staff
identified some potential positive impacts of fractional fee units in the
Town of Vail
A) Activity during the "shoulder seasons" tends to increase due to an
increase in year -round occupancy;
6) The attraction of revenue - generating tourists;
C) The efficient utilization of resources. This is the "warm beds" concept;
D) More pride of ownership and community buy -in with fractional fee club
units than with accommodation units;
E) Increased levels of occupancy, and
F) Increased resort exposure due to the extensive number of interval
owners.
Staff believes these potential positive impacts are still true today. 0
12
d. Employee housing may be required as part of any new or
redevelopment fractional fee club project requesting density
over that allowed by zoning. The number of employee
housing units will be consistent with employee impacts that
are expected as a result of the project.
The staff included the fractional fee club units into the calculation of the
employee generation resulting from the proposed major exterior alteration
and conditional use permit requests. Based strictly on the number of club
units, the development will generate a need for 7 "news' employees.
When the multiplier of 0.30 is factored in, 2.1 of the "news' employees
which the developer must provide deed - restricted housing for, are
generated by the fractional fee club. There is no change in the employee
generation requirement as a result of the amended proposal.
e. The applicant shall submit to the Town a list of all owners of
existing units within the project or building; in written
statements from 100% of the owners of existing units
indicating their approval, without condition, of the proposed
fractional fee club. No written approval shall be valid if it is
signed by the owner more than 60 days prior to the date of
filing the application for a conditional use.
The applicant, Ron Bryne, d.b.a. VML, L.L.C., has written legal authority
to act on the behalf of the owners of the property. No other written
approval is required.
•
13
E BAIIABIRAL]IN ASSOCIATES, IINC.
PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
March 5, 2001
George Ruther
Chief of Planning
Town of Vail
75 S. Frontage Road
Vail, CO 81632
Re: Amendment to Conditional Use Permit for Vail Mountain Lodge
Bear George:
We are submitting to the Town of Vail a proposed amendment to the conditional use permit for a
Fractional Fee Club at the Vail Mountain Lodge that was approved last spring. We wish to add
one additional fractional fee club unit (FFU) to the seven that were already approved. The
proposed change in use will not have any exterior impacts to the design of the building and the
proposed building will remain in compliance with the requirements of the PA zone district,
parking requirements, and all other development standards of the Zoning Regulations.
In conjunction with this change we are reducing the number of accommodation units (a
permitted use) from 30 units in the previous approval to 27 units (which remains an increase in
accommodation units over the 20 existing accommodation units). In essence, three
accommodation units are being converted to a fractional fee club unit. Additionally, the large
dwelling unit on the east end of the building is being converted to two smaller dwelling units.
These changes are fully in compliance with the PA zoning and all other applicable zoning
standards for the site and do not require Planning Commission approval as these uses (dwelling
units and accommodation units) are permitted as of right on the property.
We believe the proposed changes are consistent with the criteria for a conditional use permit and
are consistent with the March 13, 2000 Planning and Environmental Commission approval. The
change to the Fractional Fee Club represents only a minor change to the overall program for the
building.
If you need additional information please do not to call our office at 926 -7575.
Since ely,
t
Thom r CP
Edwards Village Center, Suite C -209 PK - 970.926.7575
0105 Edwards Village Boulevard Fax - 970.926.7576
Post Office Box 2658 www,braunassociates.com
Edwards, Colorado 81632
•
•
To:
FROM
DATE
MEMORANDUM
Planning & Environmental Commission
Community Development Department
March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Town Council on a zoning code
text amendment to Section 12 -71-1-7, (Exterior Alterations or
Modifications), to correct an error in the prescribed procedure for certain
types of Design Review applications for properties in the Lionshead
Mixed -Use 1 Zone District.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
E. DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The Community Development Department has identified a need to correct an error in the
prescribed development review procedures for exterior alterations or modifications
(Section 12 -7H -7) to buildings located in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU -1) District.
The purpose of this text amendment request is clarify the intent of the development
review procedures for exterior alterations or modifications for buildings in the LMU —1
District and to eliminate the existing inaccuracy. The purpose of this meeting is to
provide the Planning & Environmental Commission with an opportunity to review the
proposed corrections and to forward its recommendation on the text amendment to the
Vail Town Council.
Pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7 (A), Prescription of the Zoning Regulations, in part,
"the regulations prescribed in this Title—may be amended , or repealed by the
Town Council in accordance with the procedures prescribed in this Chapter."
Pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7 (B), Initiation of the Zoning Regulations,
1. An amendment of the regulations of this Title or a change in district boundaries
may be initiated the Town Council on its own motion, by the Planning and
Environmental Commission on its own motion, by petition of any resident or
property owner in the Town, or by the Administrator.
2. A petition for amendment of the regulations or a change in district boundaries
shall be filed on a form to be prescribed by the Administrator. The petition shall
include a summary of the proposed revision of the regulations, or a complete
description of proposed changes in district boundaries and a map indicating the
existing and proposed district boundaries. If the petition is for a change in district
boundaries, the petition shall include a list of the owners of all properties within
100 the boundaries of the area to be rezoned or changed, and the property adjacent
thereto. The owners' list shall include the name of all owners, their addresses,
and a general description of the property owned by each. Accompanying the list
shall be stamped, addressed envelopes to each owner to be used for the mailing
of the notice of hearing. The petition also shall include such additional
information as prescribed by the Administrator.
As permitted by Section 12- 3 -7(B), the Community Development Department has
initiated the proposed text amendment request. The text amendment request is being
reviewed in accordance with the provisions prescribed in Section 12 -3 -6, Hearings of
the Zoning Regulations.
The development review process for exterior alterations or modifications to new and /or
existing buildings located in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU -1) District is outlined in
Section 12 -7H -7, of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations. The proposed text
amendment to Section 12 -7H -7 is shown in strikeout and bold below:
Section 12 -7H -7. Exterior Alterations or Modifications is hereby amended as follows,
12 -7H -7: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS:
A. Review Require&
The construction of a new building or the alteration of an existing building that is
not a major exterior aiteraticn as described in Section 12 -7H -7A 2 shall be
reviewed by the Design Review Board in accordance with Chapter 11 of this Title.
a. Submittal Items Required: The submittal items required for a project that
is not a major exterior alteration shall be provided in accordance with
Section 12 -11 -4.
2. However, aRY The construction of a new building or the alteration of an
existing building
rest which adds additional dwelling units, accommodation units, fractional fee
club units, timeshare units, any project which adds more than one thousand
(1, 00) square feet of commercial floor area or common space, or any project
which has substantial off -site impacts (as determined by the Administrator) shall
be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission as a major exterior
alteration in accordance with this Chapter and Section 12 -3 -6 of this Title. Any
project which requires a conditional use permit shall also obtain approval of the
Planning and Environmental Commission in accordance with Chapter 16 of this
Title. Complete applications for major exterior alterations shall be submitted in
accordance with administrative schedules developed by the Department of
Community Development for Planning and Environmental Commission and Design
Review Board review.
a. Submittal Items Required, Major Exterior Alteration: The following submittal
items are required:
1. Application: An application shall be made by the owner of the building of the
building owner's authorized agent or representative on a form provided by the
Administrator. Any application for condominiumized buildings shall be
414
authorized by the condominium association in conformity with all pertinent
requirements of the condominium association's declarations.
2_ Application; Contents: An application for a major exterior alteration shall
include the following items:
a. Completed application form, filing fee, and a list of all owners of
property located adjacent to the subject parcel. The owners list shall
include the names of all owners, their mailing address, a legal description
of the property owned by each, and a general description of the property
(including the name of the property, if applicable), and the name and
mailing address of the condominium association's representative (if
applicable). Said names and addresses shall be obtained from the current
tax records of Eagle County as they appeared not more than thirty (30)
days prior to the application submittal date.
b. A written statement describing the proposal and how the proposal
complies with the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Flan and any other
relevant sections of the `Jail Comprehensive Plan.
c. A survey stamped by a licensed surveyor indicating existing condition
on the property including the location of improvements, topography, and
natural features.
d. A current title report to verify ownership, easements, and other
encumbrances, including Schedules A and B3.
e. 'Existing and proposed site plan at a minimum scale of one inch equais
twenty feet (1" = 20'), a vicinity plan at an appropriate scale to adequately
show the project location in relationship to the surrounding area, a
landscape plan at a minimum scale of one inch equals twenty feet (1" _
20'), a roof height plan and existing and proposed building elevations at a
minimum scale of one - eighth inch equals one foot (11$" = 1'). The material
listed above shall include adjacent buildings and improvements as
necessary to demonstrate the project's compliance with the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan.
f. Sun /shade analysis of the existing and proposed building for the
spring /fait equinox (March 21 /September 23) and winter solstice
(December 21) at ten o'clock (10 :00) A.M. and two o'clock (2:00) P.M.
unless the Department of Community Development determines that the
proposed addition has no impact on the existing sun /shade pattern. The
following sun angle shall be used when preparing this
analysis:
Spring /Fall
EquinoxSun Angle
10:00 A.M.40 east of south, 50' declination
2 :00 P.M.42® west of south, 50° declination
Winter SolsticeSun Angle
10:00 A.M.30° east of south, 20 declination
2:00 P.M.30° west of south, 20° declination
g. Existing and proposed floor plans at a minimum scale of one - fourth
inch equals one foot (114" = 1') and a square footage analysis of all
existing and proposed uses.
h. An architectural or massing model of the proposed development. Said
model shall include buildings and major site improvements on adjacent
properties as deemed necessary by the Administrator, The scale of the
model shall be as determined by the Administrator.
i. Photo overlays and/or other graphic material to demonstrate the special
relationship of the proposed development to adjacent properties, public
spaces, and adopted views per Chapter 22 of this Title.
j. Parking needs assessment and vehicular circulation analysis, prepared
by a qualified professional.
k. Any additional information or material as deemed necessary by the
Administrator or the Town Planning and Environmental Commission
('PEC). The Administrator or the Planning and Environmental Commission
may, at his/her or their discretion, waive certain submittal requirements if
it is determined that the requirements are not relevant to
the proposed development nor applicable to the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan.
C.Work Sessions /Conceptual Review: If requested by either the
applicant or the Administrator, submittals may proceed to a work session
with the Planning and Environmental Commission, a conceptual review with
the Design Review Board, or a work session with the Town. Council.
D.Hearing: The public hearing before the Planning and Environmental
Commission shall be held in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of this Title.
The Planning and Environmental Commission may approve the application
as submitted, approve the application with conditions or modifications, or
deny the application. The decision of the Planning and Environmental
Commission may be appealed to the Town Council in accordance with
Section 12 -3 -3 of this Title.
E.Lapse Of Approval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed
by this Article shall lapse and become void two (2) years following the date
of approval by the Design Review Board unless, prior to the expiration, a
building permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently
pursued to completion. Administrative extensions shall be allowed for
reasonable and unexpected delays as long as code provisions affecting the
proposal have not changed. (Ord. 3(1999) § 1)
Public notification of this proposed text amendment has been provided in accordance
with the requirements prescribed by Section 12 -3 -6 C of the Zoning Regulations.
Il. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department is recommending approval of the request to
amend the text of Section 12 -71-1-7 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations. The
recommendation of approval is based upon the review of the request in accordance with
Section 12 -3 -6 (D), Evidence of the Zoning Regulations. Specifically, the staff finds that
it is imperative to clearly articulate the intent and procedures of the Town's prescribed
development regulations and that it would be irresponsible for the Town to allow
inaccuracies in the Zoning Regulations to be perpetuated.
III. NEXT STEPS IN THE REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with the hearing procedures prescribed in Section 12- 3 -6(B) of the Zoning
Regulations, the Community Development Department has scheduled a worksession
and public hearing on the first reading of an amending ordinance with the Vail Town
Council on Tuesday, April 3, 2001. The second reading of the amending ordinance is
scheduled for Tuesday, April 17, 2001.
00
4'
MEMORANDUM
To: Planning & Environmental Commission
FROM: Community Development Department
DATE: March 26, 2001
SUBJECT: A request for a recommendation to the Town Council on a zoning code
text amendment to Section 12 -71-1-7, (Exterior Alterations or
Modifications), to correct an error in the prescribed procedure for certain
types of Design Review applications for properties in the Lionshead
Mixed -Use 1 Zone District.
Applicant: Town of Wail
Planner: George Ruther
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST
The Community Development Department has identified a need to correct an error in the
prescribed development review procedures for exterior alterations or modifications
(Section 12 -7H -7) to buildings located in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU -1) District.
The purpose of this text amendment request is clarify the intent of the development
review procedures for exterior alterations or modifications for buildings in the LMU —1
District and to eliminate the existing inaccuracy. The purpose of this meeting is to
provide the Planning & Environmental Commission with an opportunity to review the
proposed corrections and to forward its recommendation on the text amendment to the
Vail Town Council.
Pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7 (A), Prescription of the Zoning Regulations, in part,
"the regulations prescribed in this Title ... may be amended, or repealed by the
Town Council in accordance with the procedures prescribed in this Chapter."
Pursuant to Section 12 -3 -7 (B), Initiation of the Zoning Regulations,
1. An amendment of the regulations of this Title or a change in district boundaries
may be initiated the Town Council on its own motion, by the Planning and
Environmental Commission on its own motion, by petition of any resident or
property owner in the Town, or by the Administrator.
2. A petition for amendment of the regulations or a change in district boundaries
shall be filed on a form to be prescribed by the Administrator. The petition shall
include a summary of the proposed revision of the regulations, or a complete
description of proposed changes in district boundaries and a map indicating the
existing and proposed district boundaries. If the petition is for a change in district
boundaries, the petition shall include a fist of the owners of all properties within
the boundaries of the area to be rezoned or changed, and the property adjacent
U
thereto. The owners' list shall include the name of all owners, their addresses,
and a general description of the property owned by each. Accompanying the list
shall be stamped, addressed envelopes to each owner to be used for the mailing
of the notice of hearing. The petition also shall include such additional
information as prescribed by the Administrator.
As permitted by Section 12- 3 -7(B), the Community Development Department has
initiated the proposed text amendment request. The text amendment request is being
reviewed in accordance with the provisions prescribed in Section 12 -3 -6, Hoarin s, of
the Zoning Regulations.
The development review process for exterior alterations or modifications to new and /or
existing buildings located in the Lionshead Mixed Use 1 (LMU -1) District is outlined in
Section 12 -7H -7, of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations. The proposed text
amendment to Section 12 -7H -7 is shown in si and bold below:
Section 12 -7H -7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications is hereby amended as follows,
12 -7H -7: EXTERIOR ALTERATIONS OR MODIFICATIONS:
A. Review Required:
1. The construction of a new building or the alteration of an existing building that is
not a major exterior alteration as described in Section 12 -7H -7A 2 shall be
reviewed by the Design Review Board in accordance with Chapter 11 of this Title.
a. Submittal Items Required: The submittal items required for a project that
is not a major exterior alteration shall be provided in accordance with
Section 12 -11 -4.
2. HoweveF, aRr The construction of a new building or the alteration of an
existing building
pejeG which adds additional dwelling units, accommodation units, fractional fee
club units, timeshare units, any project which adds more than one thousand
(1,000) square feet of commercial floor area or common space, or any project
which has substantial off -site impacts (as determined by the Administrator) shall
be reviewed by the Planning and Environmental Commission as a major exterior
alteration in accordance with this Chapter and Section 12 -3 -6 of this Title. Any
project which requires a conditional use permit shall also obtain approval of the
Planning and Environmental Commission in accordance with Chapter 16 of this
Title. Complete applications for major exterior alterations shall be submitted in
accordance with administrative schedules developed by the Department of
Community Development for Planning and Environmental Commission and Design
Review Board review.
a. Submittal Items Required, Major Exterior Alteration: The following submittal
items are required:
1. Application: An application shall be made by the owner of the building of the
building owner's authorized agent or representative on a form provided by the
Administrator. Any application for condominiumized buildings shall be
04
authorized by the condominium association in conformity with all pertinent
requirements of the condominium association's declarations.
2. Application; Contents: An application for a major exterior alteration shall
include the following items:
a. Completed application form, filing fee, and a list of all owners of
property located adjacent to the subject parcel. The owners list shall
include the names of all owners, their mailing address, a legal description
of the property owned by each, and a general description of the property
(including the name of the property, if applicable), and the name and
mailing address of the condominium association's representative (if
applicable). Said names and addresses shall be obtained from the current
tax records of Eagle County as they appeared not more than thirty (30)
days prior to the application submittal date.
b. A written statement describing the proposal and how the proposal
complies with the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan and any other
relevant sections of the Vail Comprehensive Plan..
c. A survey stamped by a licensed surveyor indicating existing condition
on the property including the location of improvements, topography, and
natural features.
d. A current title report to verify ownership, easements, and other
encumbrances, including Schedules A and B3.
e. Existing and proposed site plan at a minimum scale of one inch equals
twenty feet (1" = 20'), a vicinity plan at an appropriate scale to adequately
show the project location in relationship to the surrounding area, a
landscape plan at a minimum scale of one inch equals twenty feet (1" _
20'), a roof height plan and existing and proposed building elevations at a
minimum scale of one - eighth inch equals one foot (118" = 1'). The material
listed above shall include adjacent buildings and improvements as
necessary to demonstrate the project's compliance with the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan.
f. Sun /shade analysis of the existing and proposed building for the
spring /fall equinox (March 21 /September 23) and winter solstice
(December 21) at ten o'clock (10:00) A.M. and two o'clock (2:00) P.M.
unless the Department of Community Development determines that the
proposed addition has no impact on the existing sun /shade pattern. The
following sun angle shall be used when preparing this
analysis:
Spring /Fall
EquinoxSun Angle
10:00 A.M.40° east of south, 50° declination
2:00 P.M.42° west of south, 50° declination
Winter SolsticeSun Angle
10:00 A.M.30° east of south, 20° declination
2:O0 P.M.30 west of south, 20° declination
g. Existing and proposed floor plans at a minimum scale of one - fourth
inch equals one foot (1/4" = 1') and a square footage analysis of all
existing and proposed uses.
h. An architectural or massing model of the proposed development. Said
model shall include buildings and major site improvements on adjacent
properties as deemed necessary by the Administrator. The scale of the
model shall be as determined by the Administrator.
i. Photo overlays and /or other graphic material to demonstrate the special
relationship of the proposed development to adjacent properties, public
spaces, and adopted views per Chapter 22 of this Title.
J. Parking needs assessment and vehicular circulation analysis, prepared
by a qualified professional.
k. Any additional information or material as deemed necessary by the
Administrator or the Town Planning and Environmental Commission
(PEC). The Administrator or the Planning and Environmental Commission
may, at his /her or their discretion, waive certain submittal requirements if
it is determined that the requirements are not relevant to
the proposed development nor applicable to the Lionshead
Redevelopment Master Plan.
C.Work Sessions /Conceptual Review: If requested by either the
applicant or the Administrator, submittals may proceed to a work session
with the Planning and Environmental Commission, a conceptual review with
the Design Review Board, or a work session with the Town Council.
D.Hearing: The public hearing before the Planning and Environmental
Commission shall be held in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of this Title.
The Planning and Environmental Commission may approve the application
as submitted, approve the application with conditions or modifications, or
deny the application. The decision of the Planning and Environmental
Commission may be appealed to the Town Council in accordance with
Section 12 -3 -3 of this Title.
E.Lapse Of Approval: Approval of an exterior alteration as prescribed
by this Article shall lapse and become void two (2) years following the date
of approval by the Design Review Board unless, prior to the expiration, a
building permit is issued and construction is commenced and diligently
pursued to completion. Administrative extensions shall be allowed for
reasonable and unexpected delays as long as code provisions affecting the
proposal have not changed. (Ord. 3(1599) § 1)
f
04
4
r
Public notification of this proposed text amendment has been provided in accordance
with the requirements prescribed by Section 12 -3 -6 C of the Zoning Regulations.
11. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The Community Development Department is recommending approval of the request to
amend the text of Section 12 -71-1-7 of the Town of Vail Zoning Regulations. The
recommendation of approval is based upon the review of the request in accordance with
Section 12 -3 -6 (D), Evidence of the Zoning Regulations. Specifically, the staff finds that
it is imperative to clearly articulate the intent and procedures of the Town's prescribed
development regulations and that it would be irresponsible for the Town to allow
inaccuracies in the Zoning Regulations to be perpetuated.
Ill. NEXT STEPS IN THE REVIEW PROCESS
In accordance with the hearing procedures prescribed in Section 12- 3 -6(B) of the Zoning
Regulations, the Community Development Department has scheduled a worksession
and public hearing on the first reading of an amending ordinance with the Vail Town
Council on Tuesday, April 3, 2001. The second reading of the amending ordinance is
scheduled for Tuesday, April 17, 2001.
100
75 South Frontage Rbad
Vail, Colorado 81657
970 -479 -2138
FAX 970 -479 -2452
www ci.Vail. co. us
November 6, 2000
Mr. Art Abplanalp
Dunn, Ablanalp & Mauriello, P.C.
108 South Frontage Road West, Suite 300
Vail, CO 81657
Re: An appeal of the Planning and Environmental Commission's (PEC) September
25" approval of a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of a
seasonal ice hockey rink at the Vail Golf Course, located at 1778 Vail Valley
Drive.
Dear Art:
This letter will serve as confirmation that the Vail Town Council voted (unanimously) to
uphold the PEC's above - referenced approval with the following modifications on October
24
(modifications are indicated in italics):
1.
All mechanical equipment associated with the rink must be fully screened. if
possible, the equipment should be moved to the north side of the rink.
2.
If traffic or parking issues arise, the approval will be called up for additional
review by the PEC.
3.
The noise output of the rink and its associated equipment will be the lesser of the
55d1b (day)150db (night) output allowed under the town's noise ordinance, or the
existing noise output of 1 -70 traffic. This will be confirmed by town staff with
noise monitoring equipment.
4.
The parking lot must be maintained at all times for use at full capacity (1 t 0
spaces). No snow storage (or business activities) can be accommodated within
the parking lot.
5.
This conditional use permit will be valid between the dates of November 1 st
through April 1 st (annually) from 7.30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. daily.
6.
This approval is for a limited time period beginning November 1 st, 2000 and
ending April 1st, 2002.
7.
Full compliance with Town building ordinances and the Uniform Building Code
must be demonstrated by the applicant.
�•�� RECYCLED PAPER
i
8. Scheduling and use of the rink (through the Vail Recreation District) will be open
to the general public. Scheduling details will be addressed via a management
agreement between the Town of Vail and the Vail Recreation District.
9. The approval of this conditional use permit for the seasonal structure is
conditioned upon the approval of the associated rezoning ordinance (Ordinance
No. 23, Series of 2000) on second reading.
If you would like to discuss this matter in greater detail, please do not hesitate to contact
me at (970) 479-2140.
Sincerely,
Brent Wilson, AICP
Planner 11
041
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is entered into by and between the Town of
Vail, Colorado (TOV) and the Vail Recreation District (VRD), hereinafter referred to as
the Parties.
A. PURPOSE:
To effectively manage the use of the Vail Golf Course temporary ice facility (hereinafter
referred to as "the Facility ") for the mutual benefit of both parties. To provide a
significant amount of ice time for organized hockey activities and public skating.
B. OBJECTIVE AND STATEMENT OF MUTUAL INTERESTS AND BENEFITS:
It is to the mutual benefit and interest of the Parties to manage the use of the Facility for
the benefit of both organized and informal recreation activities.
C. THE TOWN OF VAIL SHALL-
1 ) Provide the improvements to be used in the operation of the facility.
D. VAIL RECREATION DISTRICT SHALL:
1) Manage the operation of the Facility in accordance with the provisions of this
GO MOU,
2) Provide a minimum of 7.5 hours of public ice time each week at the Facility to
supplement the 10.5 hours of weekly public ice time now provided at the Dobson
Ice Arena. This public ice time will be provided between the hours of 7:30 a.m.
and 11:00 p.m. As this agreement establishes "minimum" requirements,
additional public ice time may be scheduled without amendment or modification
to this MOU.
E. MODIFICATION:
Modifications within the scope of the instrument shall be made by mutual consent of the
parties, by the issuance of a written modification, signed and dated by all parties, prior to
any changes being executed.
F. TERMINATION:
As long as the improvements remain in place, this MOU cannot be terminated, in whole
or in part. without the mutual written consent of both parties.
C7
G. PARTICIPATION IN SIMILAR AGREEMENTS:
This instrument does not restrict the Town of Vail or Vail Recreation District from
participating in similar activities, either individually or with the same or other public or
private agencies, organizations or individuals.
H. NON -FUND OBLIGATION DOCUMENT
This instrument is neither fiscal nor a funds obligating document. Any endeavor
involving reimbursement, contribution of funds, or transfer of anything of value between
the parties to this instrument will be handled in accordance with applicable laws,
regulations, and procedures including those for government procurement and printing.
PRINCIPAL CONTACTS:
The principal contacts for this instrument are:
Bob McLaurin Piet Pieters, Executive Director
Town Manager Vail Recreation District
Town of Vail 700 S. Frontage Road
75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657
Vail, CO 81657 970- 479 -2461
970 -479 -2138
J. COMPLETION DATE:
This instrument is executed as of the last date shown below and expires no later than
December 31, 2002 at which time it is subject to review, renewal or expiration.
K. THIRD PARTIES:
This agreement does not create or grant any rights to third parties. This agreement can
not be utilized as a basis for any cause of action by third parties to this agreement,
neither jointly nor individually.
THE PARTIES HERETO HAVE EXECUTED THIS AGREEMENT.
B b McLaurin, Piet Pieters,
Town Manager Executive Director
Town of Vail, Colorado Vail Recreation District
03/)
Date Date
*4
3011 Booth Falls Road, North Side
Vail, Colorado 81657
March 12, 2001
Planning and Environmental Commission
Town of Vail
Community Development Department
75 South Frontage Road 'West
Vail, CO 81657
Re: Rezoning of 3160 Booth Falls Road/
Part of Lot 12, Vail Village 12' Filing
Dear Commissioners:
I will be out of town on business and cannot attend the hearing. Please read the following missive:
We live on the west side of Booth Falls Road, directly opposite of the proposed rezoning. Presently, there is a
tennis court located on the property, which is adjacent to the Vail Mountain School soccer field. There is open
space to the east and north.
We purchased our home in the summer of 1985. One of the considerations of this location was that the view of
the upper valley was unobstructed and there was an open feel. We did not want to live in an area where we were
surrounded by houses. We were concerned about development in the area but we were assured by our real estate
representative that the land directly to the East (the subject property) was zoned for open space and could not be
developed. A tennis court existed but this did not disturb the openness.
In the last communication we received from Braun Associates, Inc., they implied that the land was to be sold to
the Vail Mountain School. The land is currently owned by the Booth Falls Condominiums at the top of the hill.
As I understand it, they are trying to raise money to build a retaining wall to resist the rock fall by selling the
seldom -used tennis court property. We were not aware that rezoning was proposed to build multifamily dwellings
until we received the your latest notice of a public hearing, scheduled for March 26, 2001.
While I sympathize with the Condominium owners, they were aware of the rock fall area when they purchased
their property. If they wish to build a retaining wall, a general assessment can be levied.
I feel that my quality of life will be affected if you allow rezoning. I also feel that my property value will be
significantly and adversely impacted by buildings, which will compromise the openness. Everywhere we look
there is new building on every piece of land. I was a high school student when Vail opened and I have seen the
growth from when I could only afford to eat at the Bridge Street Deli, and we slept in our cars near the Night
Latch, to the present when I am now a property owner. While I realize that we cannot stop progress and growth,
is it necessary to allow building on every piece of open space, especially when that open space was zoned as such
for a reason?
Please deny this petition for rezoning
We may only be one family but it is our property, which is being affected. If you consider granting this request,
please give us the right to approve any building, which may be proposed so that large structures are not built and
we can maintain as much of the open feel as possible. In addition, I feel that we should be financially
compensated for the reduction in our property value, which is surely to follow. The Condominium homeowners
will make a profit on this sale and their values will increase, while mine will decrease. This would be very unfair.
Thank you for your consideration of our request.
Sincerely yours,
K. Lee Ku ke and Amy 1. Kuhlke
� rowAI of vArL a
Project Name:
Project Description:
Participants;
Project Address: 352 E MEADOW DR VAIL
OWNER VML LLC
285 BRIDGE ST
VAIL CO
81657
License:
APPLICANT DOMINIC MAURIELLO
Braun Associates Inc
Po Box 2658
Edwards, Co 81632
License:
•
03/09/2001 Phone:
Amendment to a conditional use permit to add one additional fractional fee club unit
PEC Number: PECO10015
03/09/2001 Phone: 926 -7575
Location:
Legal Description: Lot: Block: Subdivision: VAIL CLUB CONDOMINIUMS
Parcel Number: 210108255001
Comments:
BOARD /STAFF ACTION
Motion By: Cahill
Second By: Schofield
Vote: 5 -0
Conditions:
Action: APPROVED
Date of Approval: 03/26/2001
Cond: 8
(PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of
Vail staff and /or the Design Review Board,
Planner; George Ruther
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tel: 970.479.2139 fax: 970,479.2452
web: www.d.vail.co.us
PEC Fee Paid: $200.00
L
U ."
"
TO hfir OF VA...
Planning and Environmental Commission
ACTION FORM
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657
tell: 970,479,2139 Fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail,co.us
Project Name: Tang Residence
Project Description:
Participants:
Project Address: 185 FOREST RD VAIL
OWNER TANG, OSCAR
185 Forest Road
Vail CO
81657
License:
APPLICANT RAY NEILSEN
143 E Meadow Dr #499A
Vail CO
81657
License:
•
Type II EHU
PEC Number: PECO10010
02/21/2001 Phone:
02/21/2001 Phone: 476 -8038
Location:
Legal Description: Lot: 25 Block: 7 Subdivision: WAIL VILLAGE FILING 1
Parcel Number: 210107113026
Comments:
BOARD /STAFF ACTION
Motion By: John Schofield
Second By: Doug Cahill
Vote: 5 -0
Conditions:
Action: APPROVED
Date of Approval: 03/26/2001
Cond: CON0004603
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Community Development Department
shall receive proof from the applicant that a Type II Restrictive Covenant has been
recorded with the Eagle County Clerk and Recorder's Office, thereby ensuring that
the employee housing unit will be permanently restricted for employee housing.
Planner: Ann Kjerulf
PEC Fee Paid: $0.00
Approved 419/01
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
•
r �
�J
Monday, March 26, 2001
PROJECT ORIENTATION 1- Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME
MEMBERS PRESENT
Diane Golden
Brian Doyon
John Schofield
Doug Cahill
Galen Aasland
Site Visits :
1. Okubo residence -- 5027 Ute Lane
2, Vail Mountain School — 3160 Katsos Ranch Road
3. Tang residence — 185 Forest Road
4. Cascade Hotel — 1295 Westhaven Drive
5. Peters residence — 2955 Bellflower Drive
6. Brandess Building — 2077 N. Frontage Road
Driver: Brent
�
NOTE: If the PE4 hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 p.m.
Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers
11:00 am
12:15 pm
2:00 pm
A request for variances from Section 12 -6D -6 (Setbacks) and Title 14 (Development Standards -
locating required parking in the Right -of -Way) to allow for a residential addition and remodel
locaie�' at 2955 Bellflower Dr. ! Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Intermountain.
Appli: ant: Alan Peters, represented by Braun Associates
Planner. Allison Ochs
•
Allison Ochs presented the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for approval.
Dominic Mauriello, representing the applicant, described how the proposal had been modified since
the previous meeting. Dominic requested that the applicant be allowed to work out an arrangement
with the adjacent property owner regarding screening or landscaping of the proposed parking area,
so that it world not be necessary to return to the PEG.
Doug Cahill : tated that he was in favor of the proposal and changes that had been made since the
original proposal.
John Schofield had no comments
Diane Golden had no comments, other than the landscaping adjacent to the parking area be
reviewed.
Brian Doyor, asked for clarification on the parking requirement.
POW,NV OF PAIL
MEMBERS ABSENT
Chas Bernhardt
Approved 419/01
Allison Ochs clarified the requirements for parking.
Galen Aasland stated that he felt that this was not a case of special privilege.
John Schofield made a motion to approve the request, in accordance with the conditions and
findings in the staff memo. 0
Diane Golden seconded the motion.
The motion carried 5 -0.
2. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for a Type 11 Employee Housing Unit (EHU),
located at 185 Forest Road /Lot 26, Block 7, Vail Village 1" Filing,
Applicant: Oscar Tang, represented by Ray Nielsen, AIA
Plarr:er: Ann Kjeruif
Ann Kjerulf presented the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for approval.
Ray Neilson vvas available for questions on behalf of the applicant.
Brian Doyon stated that the applicant should be aware that the EHU has to be rented in accordance
with the most recently adopted Employee Housing requirements.
Doug Cahill had no comments.
John Schofield had no comments.
Diane Golden stated that employee housing is important for the town.
Galen Aasland stated that the proposal met the letter of the code for employee housing.
John Schofield made a motion to approve the request, in accordance with the conditions and
findings in the staff memo.
Doug Cahill seconded the motion.
The motion carried 5 -0.
3. A request for a conditional use permit, to allow for a Type II Employee Housing Unit (EHU),
loca`k, at 1552 Matterhorn Circle /Lot 2, Timber Vail Subdivision.
Appli, nt: Ranch Creek Development
Planner: Bill Gibson
Bill Gibson gave an overview of the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for approval.
Galen Aasland asked for public comment.
There was no oublic comment.
Doug Cahill stated that he was in favor of the request and that the Town was moving in the right
direction wit' employee housing.
John Schofield stated that he was in favor of the proposal, but requested that the Town Council be
informed that ,with additional employee housing, it would be necessary for increased surveillance
and enforcement of EHU's.
Diane Golder. thanked the applicant for proposing employee housing.
John Schofield made a motion to approve the request.
Approved 419101
Diane Goiden seconded the motion
The motion carried 5 -0.
4. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6C -6 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for a
proposed addition in the rear setback, located at 5027 Ute Lane /Lot 31, Vail Meadows Filing
1.
Applicant: T. Larry & Renee Okubo
Planner: Bill Gibson
Bill Gibson gave an overview of the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for approval.
The applicant, Larry Okubo, gave a historical account of the subject property and described the
physical con st -aints on the property -- those being the creek and adjacent hillside.
Doug Cahill said he was concerned with the potential for grading on U.S. Forest Service property.
John Schcficlr_. asked staff if there was a geological hazard report in the file.
Bill Gibson stated that he was not aware of an existing report, but that a report would be required
with a new DRB application.
John Schofieid stated that another geological hazard report should not be required due to the
additional expense required. He stated that USFS approval would be required if there would be
grading on their property.
Diane Golden had no comments.
Galen Aasland had no comments.
0 Brian Doyon :;ad r,o comments.
John Schofi�) c made a motion that the request be approved with the condition that USFS
permission b -, obtained for grading on their property.
George Ruther interjected that DRB approvai would be required in addition to an approval from the
PEC. He adfed that a geological hazard report would absolutely be required in association with the
DRB application for the proposed addition_
John Schofi..ld agreed with George and also agreed to modify the motion.
Galen Aasland reiterated the motion with the change.
The motion \i as seconded by Doug Cahill.
The motion carried 5 -0.
5. A re uest for a variance from Section 12 -7D -5 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for the
additicn of mechanical equipment within the required rear setback at the Brandess Building,
loca`- t at 2077 N. Frontage Rd. /Lot 39A, Buffehr Creek Subdivision.
Applie2 nt: Jayne Brandess Irrevocable Trust, represented by Abacus Communications
Plan^,er: Allison Ochs
Allison Ochs gave an overview of the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for denial.
The applicant, Glen Klocke, spoke in favor of the proposal and described how the mechanical
equipment - , 7 be screened. Glen Klocke stated that optional locations for the equipment had
been ex rni —! but none of these were feasible alternatives.
Approved 4/9/01
John Schofield asked how big the equipment would be.
Glen Klocke orovided the dimensions.
John Schofield asked if AT &T had similar equipment.
Glen Klocke said that the equipment was similar, but sat on the ground.
Doug Cahill asked if other alternatives, such as vaulting the equipment underground could be
pursued.
Glen Klocke stated that this was not a feasible alternative due to snow.
Doug Cahill asked about the possibility of putting the equipment above the existing east staircase.
Glen Klocke stated that several locations had been examined, but none of them were feasible.
Doug Cahill stated that all of the possibilities had not been exhausted.
John Schofield stated that there are other options. John mentioned that the code does not consider
cost and the granting this variance would be a grant of special privilege because there were other
options.
Diane Golden stated that she agreed with John and that another option should be pursued.
Brian Doyor pike that the impacts on residential neighbors should be considered. He added that
another less ,isually impactful proposal should be pursued. He stated that he would be in favor of
putting the equipment on the east side.
Galen A.asla, -,. , said that allowing this variance would be a grant of special privilege.
•
Diane Golder, asked if the applicant would like to table this item until the next meeting 0
Glen Kicckc :stated that he would not like to table the request; but wanted a vote.
Brian Doyo -) - - nade a motion to deny the request.
John Scnof4t 5eccnded the motion.
The motion {.:?rried E- - -0
6. A re.� {lest for a modification to an existing conditional use permit to allow for the use of two
modular classroom units at Vail Mountain School, located at 3160 Katsos Ranch Road / Lot
12, 31::k 2, Vail Village 12 Filing,
Aer'ic.ant: Vail Mountain School
Planner; Brent Wilson
Brent Wilson requested that the item be postponed until later in the meeting when the applicants
arrived.
7. A rec,,.cst for a conditional use permit, to amend an existing conditional use permit, to allow
for ore additional Fractional Fee Club unit, located at Vail Mountain Lodge, 352 E. Meadow
Driva,Part of Tract B, Vail Village 1 Filing.
Aooiicant: Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: George Ruther
George Rutner gave an overview of the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for approval.
Dominic Mauriello spoke on behalf" of the applicant.
4
Approved 419101
Brian Dcyon had no comments.
Doug Cahill noted the increase in keys was favorable and stated that he had no issues with the
request, since it complied with underlying zoning.
S John Schofield had no comments.
Diane Golden had no comments, other than that she was happy to see Dominic.
Galen Aasland stated that he was in favor of the request.
Brian Doyon made a motion to approve the request,
Doug Cahill seconded the motion.
George ;Rut . , (: 4 interjected to ask that the motion be in accordance with the findings in the staff
memo.
Brian Doyon amended the motion
Diane Golden asked that the parking situation at the VML be reviewed.
The motion carried 5 -0.
8. A request for a recommendation to the Town Council on a zoning code text amendment to
S c jn 12 -7H -7, (Exterior Alteraticns or Modifications), to correct an error in the prescribed
procedure for certain types of Design Review applications for properties in the Lionshead
Mixed -Use 1 Zcne District.
Applicant: Town of Vail
flan riar: George Ruiher
George Ruthi;r gave an overview of the staff memo, Staff was requesting a recommendation from
the Piann ng and Environmental Commission on a zoning code text amendment to Section 12 -7H -7.
Galen, Aasia, askeJ for public comment.
There was .ic public comment.
Brian Dinyon, z. ;ked staff to clarify how this situation would apply with a forced renovation such as
with the
George ?ut' stated that DRB approval would be required.
Doug Cahill stated that if the text amendment would help clarify the intention of the code, that this
was pcsi`,vl!.
John Schcf ' 7!c had no comments.
Diane Gold,�r h d no comments.
Doug Cahill recommended that the text amendment be presented to the Town Council as proposed
in the ct ~ff r .aro
Briar Doycn sc:,conded the motion.
0 The motion carried 5 -0.
The plum r _ommiss:on asked to review the previous meeting minutes and minor corrections were
Approved 419/01
requested.
Brian Doyon moved to approve the minutes with the corrections as requested by staff.
Doug Cahill seconded the motion.
The motion carried 4 -0 (Diane abstained).
The planning commission moved to table items 9, 10, 11, and 12.
John Schofield made a motion to table those items.
Brian Do }ran: _cconded the motion.
The motion c: ,tried 5 -0.
The planning •_ommission returned to item 6.
+6.... Va, -I 44atinL'ain School
Brian Doyon ,asked to be recused from this item, as his firm was representing the Mountain School.
John disclosed that his wife was on the Mountain School Board, but added that there was
no conflict of interest.
Brent 'Nilson gave an overview of the staff memo. The staff recommendation was for approval,
subject to ti findings and conditions on page 3 of the staff memo.
Galen r ;', r_c,ues clarification on staff's position given the previous letter provided by the
applicant stating that the applicant would not come back with a request to continue the conditional
use perr.t.
Brent W lson, .3sporded the applicant was moving forward in good faith and had already begun
construction of a portion of the approved "Phase I" improvements, in accordance with the approved
development ,_ian from 2000. Brent stated the outstanding land negotiations and the lack of
sufficient funding pn c ?uded permanent expansion in the immediate future.
Diane Golden as"ced staff to clarify why an extension of the conditional use permit should be
granter'
Galen Aa. larr asked how this application varied from the previous Vail Associates Children's Ski
School Tent conditional use permit extensions.
Brent Wilso ;- - asporded that the Mountain School had to deal with difficult funding issues, a
situatiCr simil <.,r to that of Ski Club Vail and that funding was not the issue with Vail Associates_ He
stated - that the Vail land Use Plan and General Use zoning acknowledged public or quasi- public
schools as .a public benefit. Brent stated the applicant had a vested development right, but was not
legally bolInd or obligated in any way to construct the approved campus master plan.
John Schofield asked if the applicant would have to come back with development plan revisions, if
the scl -ool ± h!: se to cleviate from the approved master plan.
Brent \Nilso7 said "yes."
Galer Aasls. ^r` Psked for public comment.
Peter Abuis si ake on behalf of the Mountain School, stating that there would be additional students
this fall ar-d -aE spare +ryas needed to accommodate these students. He added that additional time
was needed tc raise the funds required to construct the improvements as planned. 0
Galen rn a s l w 2ddressed the issue of the original conditional use permit terms. He asked what
Approved 4/9/01
assura,nc,r t;nare was that the MoIL,ntain School would not come back in the future for another
extension of the conditional use permit.
Mr. Abuisi stated that the funding was falling into place and that construction should begin in the
summer of 2v02, with occupation of the building by December, 2002.
Galen Aaslar, -' asked for public Input.
Bill Eggers asked if this request would have an impact on the size of the school or number of
students..
John Schefie stated that under the General Use Zone District, the size of the structure would be
determined by the Planning and Environmental Commission.
Brent IAlilson sated the previous PEC approval from 2000 carried a condition capping the number
students to 300, due to traffic issues along the frontage road.
Bill Eggers expressed his concern that the school could get very large in the future. He further
expressed f z; fear of urban sprawl and that other down - valley locations should be investigated for
private :schools.
Mr. Abuisi ibed that the Mountain School philosophy was to remain small and that the school
would not function properly if it got too large.
Brea . - ':• '_° at if the school wanted to get bigger, they would have to come back to the
PEC for a revised development plan and conditional use permit. Therefore, Mr. Eggers would be
notified as an adjacent property owner.
Alan S caft s,pal(a as a neighboring property owner. He asked what could be done to mitigate his
view, due to t, trailer that could be put in.
Gale ^ , "k , .� asked tr additional public comment.
Mr. Abuisi c;arfied that the School was attempting to raise enough funding to construct all of the
proposed ir. r)_ in one summer, as opposed to two summers.
Galen c_ expressed his frustration that the school's long -term plan was not very clear and that
more informa'Lion was required.
Mr. Egj?rzrs s., ,gested that the design details for the trailer be presented,
Mr. Scct`. E couid be done :about the air - conditioning equipment.
Ned Gw2L— h!nr,; sDQ.ke on behalf of the applicant. He stated that screening of the air- conditioning
equipro nt ;,c; _ l A bp taken care of during construction. He also stated that the design details for the
trailer %would I ave to be considered by the Design Review Board and that this meeting was to
discus:- fhe tei mr, of the condit;onal use permit.
Doug Cahill _ ;ggested that the master plan be followed and that there be assurance that the
student nurr.br.rs can be iccommodated. Doug asked staff to clarify the situation with the
mechanical equipment and proposed screening.
Brent Wilson stated that one outstanding condition from the 2000 Design Review approval was a
screening r'san fr tl, HVAC mechanical equipment. The DRB would have to review any proposed
mecl%_. n _•eeni g ;Tans prior to construction, pursuant to the 2000 condition. Brent stated this
world Tr.cst z, -ropriataly be addressed at the April 4` DRB meeting.
0 Doug Cahill asked what would happen to the trailer during construction.
Scott Lind-311 stated 'hat the terrperary structure would be located on the east side of the school
7
Approved 4/9/01
during the school year and in the parking lot during the summer
Doug Cahill suggested that the DRB examine the trailer location during its review. Doug stated that
the work done ay the school to this point had been favorable, such as the removal of the rockfall
berm, redirecting of traffic through the parking lot and provision of overflow parking for the Booth
Falls trailhead. He added that he would like to see the permanent improvements occur as soon as
possible.
John Schofieid asked for clarification on the content of the approved development plan and
components or the approved phases.
Brent Wilson clarified this. Phasic One involves removal of the rockfall berm, an extension of the
classrocrn vv ng at tire- ru,ar of the building, an amended access plan, and the removal of the
ternpc ci-�:sz.roorn building. Phase Two involves the addition of faculty housing and an
auditorium. r,-ent stated Phase Two would trigger the need for road improvements, pursuant to the
CDOT code for the frontage road.
John Schofield stated that the Mountain School was a public benefit. He stated that he would not
have a ro ,le rn 'n it" extending the CUP for the existing trailer, but that he was having difficulty with
allowing a ssi - ,- , n~ trailr. r.
Diane Golden that the issue of accommodating additional students should have been
addr= ssYd T -1: - h sacne; and that additional students should not have been accepted, if it was
unce:tarn t ..: i ssude Its would be accommodated. She added that she was not sure how to
deal wa.th the _ _ �. or, ut E t.
Brent VVilson asked the PEC whether or not the PEC would like to have the DRB review a
scraeningllaridsoapirig plan on April 4`"
Diane Ro'.d- n J.:d "yrs.
Galen AasL:id fated that the applicant needed to be treated as fair as other applicants, and that
the ;ter~ s,i_, ! be ::. '-;ed to a later meeting, so that the applicant could provide more details on the
futu lac _ - .e s ,hcci.
Ned Gw- athmoay spoke again on behalf of the school. He stated that a development plan exists but
can not be pursued this summer and that an extension was necessary to accommodate the
Galen ;-sked i' the property to the north was a factor.
Peter P,`:...:.! ' that the prrperty had not yet been acquired- He then spoke in defense of the
NlQU.7t= ,.`-D! r-" ::r:lded that plannirg has occurred in good faith and that the proposed
imprc v- -e , ;`i -3vc diligently pursued.
John S::I'1- =fald stated that he did ;not think it was reasonable to allow the existing plan to be
modifi =r' to 7, 11cw "",E delay in construction while accommodating the additional students. John
added .h=it f .:,p funding for the project is not in place, the conditional use permit should expire by
June, 2002.
Bill Eggers stated that the removal of the trailers would result in forty students being thrown out.
Dian? ^cl^ l ifs tl�c!t she would be in favor of the proposal with that condition.
Galer stated that a better plan could be provided with more time.
John; -.`1ofii ' ' ^tested that a building permit would have to be in place by ,tune 1, 2002 or the trailers
shauflr# r- r r-- -'Jed.
Diane Colder ;2sked fcT firther clarification on the location of the second modular unit during the
8
Approved 419101
summer.
John SchofialL: asked if off -site storage or screening could be considered.
Ned Gwathrney stated that the unit could be moved slightly or moved off -site.
John Scnofie,u made a motion to approve the conditional use permit to allow for a second modular
classroom in addition to the existing unit, in accordance with the site. plan as presented in the staff
memo and with the findings as presented on page 3 of the staff memo and with the three conditions
as stated in the staff memo, with the two additional conditions. One is that if a building permit for
the ap;: oved cievelopment plan is not issued by June 1, 2002, that the conditional use permit be
revoked. Jcnn added the condition that the mechanical equipment at the rear of the building be
screene.d d,_,• :::g the summer of 2001 in an effort to mitigate neighbors' aesthetic concems.
Bran" V: G 3cr1 .,iarifie i that the original conditional use permit for school expansion was approved on
Aprii 24, 2000 and would otherwise lapse on April, 24, 2002, if the June 1, 2002 deadline was not in
place.
Doug Ca,fill seconded - the motion.
The 'n )iicn :-ai ad =f -0 (Brian Doyon recused
D+cug to adjourn the meeting.
Diana ;;ecorded the motion.
The motion c;; tied 4
9. "G feq= _ s fo .. _t final review of a conditional use permit, to allow for the construction of Phase
I of Dc lovan Park improvements, generally located southeast of the intersection of
Circ i_. and the South Frontage Road.
pl:li t. ?'cwn of Vail
Planner: George Ruther
TABLED UNTIL APRIL 9, 2001
10. A finai review of a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for a rezoning from
,�cllicl:1_ure and Open Space to Primary/Secondary Residential and a Minor Subdivision to
vvo r asicantial lots and a request for a recommendation to the Town Council for an
to the Vail Land Use Plan changing the land use designation from PubliclSemi-
Public use to Low Density Residential, located at 3160 Booth Falls Road/Part of Lot 12,
- -Jai Vil gage 12; h Filing,
;prfi gat: Boothfalls Homeowner's Association, represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
PI r li = ussall Forrest
�^►�{ F i. NNTIL APRIL 9, 2001
11. A r eye : ` i fc a,riance from Section 12 -7H -10 of the Vail Town Code, to allow for an
addiitiun in '! ,e :-ear setback, located at 660 West Lionshead Place /Lot 1, Vail
- ion - head 1't Filing, 1 Addition.
Applicant: Lions Square Condo Association
mill Gibson
TABL`D UNTIL APRIL 23, 2001
12. - v;;rksessi_n to discuss a proposed special development district to allow for
of a new conference facility /hotel; and a final review of conditional use
9
Approved 419!01
;,err iii `o si`a Cr the construction of fractional fee units and Type III employee housing
units ai. 13 Vail Road 1 Lots A, B, C, Block 2, Vail Village Filing 2.
Appric2nt: Doramar Hotels, represented by the Daymer Corporation
Planner: Brent Wilson
TABLED UNTIL_ APRIL. 23, 2001
13. A recufast for a major amendment to Special Development District #4, to allow for the
c:f �?r, existing indoor tennis court to a spa, located at 1295 Westhaven
'?r;w3l"'Gscade %/illage.
'_ -C Vail Hotel Inc_
Allison Ochs
1AtTH N
14. Approval of March 12, 2001 minutes
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular !ours in he project planner's office located at the Town of Vail Community
Developrneri: Department, 75 South Frontage Road. Please call 479 -2138 for information.
Sign langtii age available upon request with 24 hour notification. Please call 479 -2356, Telephone for the
Hearing Impaired, ;or information_
Community Development Department
•
•
10