Loading...
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