Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-0624 PECTHIS STEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE' t NOTICE 4S HEREBY GIVEN that thr Ptanning a - - Envi[onrnentaV Commis non of the Town of Vail wl hhold a pdblic headny In accordance wth-seelign - 12 -3 -8 at the Mun'cipal Code of thr Town of Vain on June 24, 24)02, at 2:00 RM. in ;re Town of :'ail, Municipal Budding. In consideration ol'. - .' A .request for a recommendatan to [ha TovrnI Council for the adoption o w of tw vie corridors with- . In Lionshead and to ameriid Section f2 -22-4 (Adoption of View Corridors). -Town Code Io in- clude View Corridors i, and 2 in Tiflis 12, as iderili find withat the Llonsh'ad Redevelopment Hasler yyy r Flan View CiXrldor 1 Is located appraxirnately at ] the main pedestrian exit looking southwest ta'n�ards the Gondola lift line.. View Cor rider 2 is Toasted ap proffII lely from. the,pedostdaWraza at the east: Ono of It'e 4fthouse todge look souIII IU the the two vIcyj r rir ., -. .. . Gondola li?t line, A mare speciFc- qal ddsenplidn �' De e �Pmrnt�a iao on file it ,he Cammuroi . To" of Vail .�gppt;cant: p,tlisan varaT1Ue from Ochs t Pla' n uest fora 52-t't•7 SF•ctian' SG5 ;A req trorn Walercouzse) and o to Compliance Vail Town Cade. to allow d. - . (,U cif }, shack ' 1Gui oine Come I .Gore C form - - (,r an additla`pwthe t o on f a • Dri.,e. - . - an d to allow mated al 5t75 64ark Gore - . ring, drivew -' lynit 8- tlCadar potaFTnwn4tomes Filing �. ay. ApplicanlJohn Welaj. rroresente• by Mike Sumer _ '.. Planner: AYlsor Ochs .. A request tar a malor extn7io.Fxtta"Dr Alle in aa n oordi . . with Se ction ' '12 "Coda: and a variance i[om .once Town Code 'to allow - Ntoddications) . 12 lHeO'tf. Town i Lot B. - Section 12-76-1 at 225 Walt Street for an addition, a tst Filing B1UGk 5G. Vail Villag ar k . Eugene F Ap? fi..anl. ley, represon od oy Mark ... - Opryan. Arrhiilc - Planner Ait.sons Develop to a9ow rt olaia A request for a varia ipr the construction nice from Tithe 14, . .. - ryre Standards, c at e rri nim KaFSOs Ranch new driveway that ex s a t h e m um entry gie detlecl+on. #orate , 12th Filing. 4 - �, Roadltat 11. 840 1. Vad Viilago G E ' APPlIcant: _ i & na Reime r. represr'n d by John .. .. -John Perkins Sill Gibson - st for a variance Iron: $ECUllow lot Me A reque Vail Town Coda. 4eature al Riva (Site Coverag e 1. located Ridge Tlarth, at 33. Willow- Place,'Ldt 6. g, canstru_t,on.af a new front entry E . Block 6. vaii'J lage- 4st Filing _ iCant: Rive ith en ,jets APPI Rdge Nor ter A teats, soa„ cepresentad by Pee !Lang L.L.C. $iY1 Gibson planner' anon r s d ' • .' -' ` ` The applications and irdOhlia dun g reg - - _ -_ ..:. - lion 'svaitable Tor Pu c ns�pu� local - an otiice. . alt are . rip eat P nit DevaloPrtient far shire hours t Vail fGommu oad. ThP pubVlfjl ... ed. at the Taw tit f6antage .Sire . - - - the peparlmant• 75 Sau ro orietitaitora and TovjnV -. . P l ❑bllo hearing i en't :•. _ - - ecede the P rm - - - .. -.. invited to attend _ Vail •vVsits that P' Development DePa :. .. _ . ... - Community , .. ..:... of . . .. Please Call 479-213,1 Torndorrnatio le "P re - ... .. language irNerp.etasVan ava-i ci 479 - tion. Tor in .. (: quest W 24 -ha for the anng Impaired, . ,.2354 Te epncire _ . ' menl'{?epaftmenr. , . Cammi pity D B .� i^ the va.t Daily - Published J THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY PUBLIC NOTICE Z / /Or NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12 -3 -6 of the Municipal Code of the Town of Vail on .dune 24, 2002, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of: A request for a recommendation to the Town Council for the adoption of two view corridors within Lionshead and to amend Section 12 -22 -4 (Adoption of View Corridors), Town Code to include View Corridors 1 and 2 in Title 12, as identified within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. View Corridor 1 is located approximately at the main pedestrian exit looking southwest towards the Gondola lift line. View Corridor 2 is located approximately from the pedestrian plaza at the east end of the Lifthouse Lodge looking south up the Gondola lift line. A more specific legal description of the two view corridors is on file at the Community Development Department. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non - conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit B -1 /Cedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs A request for a major exterior alteration in accordance with Section 12 -7B -7 (Exterior Alterations or • Modifications), Town Code, and a variance from Section 12 -78 -12 (Height), Town Code, to allow for an addition, located at 225 Wall Street 1 Lot B, Block 5C, Vail Village 1 51 Filing. Applicant: Eugene Fahey, represented by Mark O'Bryan, Architect Planner: Allison Ochs A request for a variance from Title 14, Development Standards, to allow for the construction of a new driveway that exceeds the minimum entry angle deflection, located at 3275 Katsos Ranch Road /Lot 11, Block 1, Vail Village 12" Filing. Applicant: John & Gina Reimer, represented by John Perkins Planner: Bill Gibson A request for a variance from Section 12 -6H -9 (Site Coverage), Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a new front entry feature at Riva Ridge North, located at 33 Willow Place /Lot 6, Block 6, Vail Village 1 Filing. Applicant: Riva Ridge North Chalets Condo Assoc., represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects, L.L.C.. Planner: Bill Gibson 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. TO W OF VML � l PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION `rW PUBLIC MEETING SCHEDULE Monday, June 24, 2002 PROJECT ORIENTATION ! - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME 12:00 pm MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Site Visits : 1:00 pm 1. Welaj residence 5175 Black Gore Drive 2. Reimers residence — 3275 Katsos Ranch Road 3. Fahey residence — 225 Wall Street 4. Baggage Cheque — 141 E. Meadow Drive 5. Lionshead View Corridors Driver: George r ( * ) II NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 8:00 - 6:30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2 :00 pm 40 1. A request for a variance from Title 14, Development Standards, to allow for the construction of a new driveway that exceeds the minimum entry angle deflection, located at 3275 Katsos Ranch Road /Lot 11, Block 1, Vail Village 12 Filing. Applicant: John & Gina Reimer, represented by John Perkins Planner: Bill Gibson 2. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6H -9 (Site Coverage), Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a now front entry feature at Riva Ridge North, located at 33 Willow P!acefLct 6 Bock 6, Vail Village 1 Filing. Applicant: Riva Ridge North Chalets Condo Assoc., represented by PeelfLangenwalter Architects, L.L.C. Planner: Bill Gibson A request for a major exterior alteration in accordance with Section 12 -7B -7 (Exterior Alterations or Modifications), Town Code, and a variance from Section 12 -78 -12 (Height), Town Code, to allow for an addition, located at 225 Wall Street 1 Lot B, Block 5C, Vail Village 15t Filing. Applicant: Eugene Fahey, represented by Mark ©'Bryan, Architect Planner: Allison Ochs TOW N OF VAIL iii 4. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non - conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit B -1 /Cedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs 5. A request for a variance from Section 11- 413 -12B (4) Vail Town Code, to allow for a banner, located at 141 East Meadow Drive /Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1 5t Filing. Applicant: The Baggage Cheque Planner: George Ruther 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, of a text amendment to Title 12, Section 2 -2, to amend the definition of "Fraction Fee Club" and to amend Title 12, Section 16 -7A -8, to amend the Use Specific Criteria & Standards, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Rob Levine Planner: George Ruther 7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the adoption of two view corridors within Lionshead and to amend Section 12 -22 -4 (Adoption of View Corridors), Vail Town Code to include View Corridors 1 and 2 in Title 12, as identified within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. View Corridor 1 is located approximately at the main pedestrian exit looking southwest towards the Gondola lift line. View Corridor 2 is located approximately from the pedestrian plaza at the east end of the Lifthouse Lodge looking south up the Gondola lift line. A more specific legal description of the two view corridors is on file at the Community Development Department. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Russ Forrest 8. Approval of June 10, 2002 minutes 9. 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 Published June 21, 2002 in the Vail Daily. L "__1 7 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING RESULTS Monday, June 24, 2002 PROJECT ORIENTATION 1 - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Erickson Shirley Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill George Lamb Rollie Kjesbo Site Visits : 1. Welaj residence 5175 Rlack Gore Drive. 2. Reimers residence — 3275 Katsos Ranch Road 3. Fahey residence — 225 Wall Street 4. Baggage Cheque — 141 E. Meadow Drive 5, Lionshead View Corridors Driver: George 12:00 pm 1:00 pm 0 l ) NOTE: If the PEC hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6:30 Public Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm A request for a variance from Title 14, Development Standards„ to allow for the construction of a new driveway that exceeds the minimum entry angle deflection, located at 3275 Katsos Ranch Road /Lot 11, Block 1, Vail Village 12 Filing. Applicant: John & Gina Reimer, represented by John Perkins Planner: Bill Gibson WITHDRAWN 2. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6H -9 (Site Coverage), Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a new front ent feature at Riva Ridge North, located at 33 Willow Place /Lot 6, Block 6. Vail Village i Filing. Applicant: Riva Ridge North Chalets Condo Assoc., represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects, L.L.C. Planner: Bill Gibson MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: Chas Bernhardt VOTE: 6 -0 0 APPROVED WITH 1 CONDITION: MEMBERS ABSENT Gary Hartman TO WN OF VA 41L 1. That the applicant executes an encroachment agreement, or similar agreement, as deemed appropriate by Town Staff prior to the application for building permits. 3. A request for a major exterior alteration in accordance with Section 12 -713-7 (Exterior Alterations or Modifications), Town Code, and a variance from Section 12 -78 -12 (Height), Town Code, to allow for an addition, located at 225 Wall Street I Lot. B. Block 5C, Vail Village 1 st Filing. Applicant: Eugene Fahey, represented by Mark O'Bryan, Architect Planner: Allison Ochs MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: George Lamb VOTE: 6 -0 APPROVED — VARIANCE south bedroom dormer MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: Rollie Kjesbo VOTE: 6 -0 APPROVED MAJOR EXTERIOR ALTERATION south bedroom dormer MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: George Lamb VOTE: 4 -2 (Cahill & Shirley C?fJ�OSP,d� APPROVED —VARIANCE north living room dormer WITH 1 CONDITION: 1. That the applicant shall submit plans for review by the DRB for the July 3, 2002 meeting, with specific regards to the proposed roof material of the dormers. MOTION: Chas Bernhardt SECOND: George Lamb VOTE: 5 -1 (Shirley opposed) APPROVED -- MAJOR EXTERIOR ALTERATION north living room dormer 4. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code, to allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non - conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit B-1/Cedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: George Lamb VOTE: 6 -0 TABLED UNTIL JULY 8, 2002 MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: Rollie Kjesbo VOTE: 6 -0 DENIED — SETBACK VARIANCE 5. A request for a variance from Section 11- 4B -12B (4) Vail Town Code, to allow for a banner, located at 141 East Meadow Drive /Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1 Filing. Applicant: The Baggage Cheque Planner: George Ruther MOTION: Rollie Kjesbo SECOND: Doug Cahill DENIED VOTE: 6 -0 • • • 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, of a text amendment to Title 12, Section 2 -2, to amend the definition of "Fraction Fee Club" and to amend Title 12, Section 16 -7A -8, to amend the Use Specific Criteria & Standards, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Rob Levine Planner: George Ruther MOTION: John Schofield SECOND: Doug Cahill VOTE: 5-0 (Chas Bernhardt not present) UPHOLD the staff interpretation per the staff memorandum 7, A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the adoption of two view corridors within Lionshead and to amend Section 12 -22 -4 (Adoption of View Corridors), Vail Town Code to include View Corridors 1 and 2 in Title 12, as identified within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Plan. View Corridor 1 is located approximately at the main pedestrian exit looking southwest towards the Gondola lift line. View Corridor 2 is located approximately from the pedestrian plaza at the east end of the Lifthouse Lodge looking south up the vonaoia iitt iine. A more specific legal description of the two view corridors is on file at the Community Development Department. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Russ Forrest MOTION: Doug Cahill SECOND: Rollie Kjesbo VOTE: 5 -0 (Chas Bernhardt not present) TABLED UNTIL JULY 8, 2002 Planning and Environmental Commission ACTION FORM Department of Community Development TOI"T OF VAIL 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel :970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452 web: www.ci.vail.co.us Project Name: Clark Variance PEC Number: PECO20025 Project Description: Participants: Add 60 sq. ft. front entry into front setback OWNER CLARK, STEPHEN J. & JACKIE N05/13/2002 Phone: PO BOX 2065 VAIL CO 81658 License: APPLICANT CLARK, STEPHEN J. & JACKIE N05/13/2002 Phone: 476 -3307 PO BOX 2065 VAIL CO Bro @vail.net 81658 License: 0 Project Address: 4887 JUNIPER LN VAIL Location: B unit Legal Description: Lot: 7 -B Block: 4 Subdivision: BIGHORN 5TH ADDITION Parcel Number: 210113101003 Comments: BOARD /STAFF ACTION Motion By: Bernhardt Action: APPROVED Second By: Kjesbo Vote: 6 -0 Date of Approval: 06/28/2002 Conditions: Cond: 8 (PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of Vail staff and /or the appropriate review committee(s). Cond: CON0005377 That prior to Design Review approval, the applicant submit as -built drawings of the dwelling unit so staff can confirm existing GRFA that is on file with the TOV. Should the addition not comply with the GRFA requirements of the P/S zone district, the approval of this variance shall be void. 49 Planner: Allison Ochs PEC Fee Paid: $500.00 Planning and Environmental Commission - ACTION FORM Department of Community Development TO1A N OF � �� y 75 South Frontage Road, Vail, Colorado 81657 tel :970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452 web: www.ci.vail.co.us Project Name: Baggage Cheque Sign Variance PEC Number: PECO20017 Project Description: Sign variance request to install a temporary "Sale" banner Participants: • OWNER The Baggage Cheque, Inc. Colleen McCarthy 141 E Meadow Drive Vail, CO Bagcheque @aol.com 81657 License: APPLICANT The Baggage Cheque, Inc. Colleen McCarthy 141 E Meadow Drive Vail, CO Bagcheque @aol.com 81657 License: Project Address: 141 E MEADOW DR VAIL 04/15/2002 Phone: 476 -1747 04/15/2002 Phone: 476 -1747 Location: Legal Description: Lot: P Block: Subdivision: CROSSROADS OF VAIL CONDO Parcel Number: 210108202013 Comments: BOARD /STAFF ACTION Motion By: Kjesbo Second By: Cahill Vote: 6 -0 Conditions: Action: DENIED Date of Approval: Cond: 8 (PLAN): No changes to these plans may be made without the written consent of Town of Vail staff and/or the appropriate review committee(s). Planner: George Ruther PEC Fee Paid: $200.00 0 Approved 718102 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Monday, June 24, 2002 PROJECT ORIENTATION 1 - Community Development Dept. PUBLIC WELCOME MEMBERS PRESENT John Schofield Erickson Shirley Chas Bernhardt Doug Cahill George Lamb Rollie Kjesbo Site Visits : 1. Welaj residence 5175 Black Gore Drive 2. Reimers residence — 3275 Katsos Ranch Road 3. Fahey residence — 225 Wall Street 4. Baggage Cheque — 141 E. Meadow Drive 5, Lionshead View Corridors 12:00 pm 1:00 pm Driver: George � NOTE: If the PEG hearing extends until 6:00 p.m., the board may break for dinner from 6:00 - 6,30 Public _Hearing - Town Council Chambers 2:00 pm A request for a variance from Title 14, Development Standards, to allow for the construction of a new driveway that exceeds the minimum entry angle deflection, located at 3275 Katsos Ranch Road /Lot 11, Block 1, Vail Village 1.2 Filing. Applicant: John & Gina Reimer, represented by John Perkins Planner: Bill Gibson WITHDRAWN 2. A request for a variance from Section 12 -6H -9 (Site Coverage), Vail Town Code, to allow for the construction of a new front entryy feature at Riva Ridge North, located at 33 Willow PlacelLot 6, Block 6, Vail Village 1 Filing. Applicant: Riva Ridge North Chalets Condo Assoc., represented by Peel /Langenwalter Architects, L.L.C. Planner: Bill Gibson Bill Gibson made a presentation per the staff memorandum. T04Y T DF VAIL ME MBERS ABSENT Gary Hartman Approved 718102 Dave Peel spoke on behalf of the applicant. He explained the proposal and stated why the variance was needed. George Lamb said no comment Rollie Kjesbo stated no comment Erickson Shirley said no comment Doug Cahill stated that he believed that the variance was warranted and that the application complied with the criteria required to grant a variance. Chas Bernhardt had no comments. John Schofield had no comments. Doug Cahill moved to approve the variance, as requested per the staff memorandum. Chas Bernhardt seconded the motion. The motion passed 6-0. 3. A request for a major exterior alteration in accordance with Section 12 -7B -7 (Exterior Alterations or Modifications), Town Code, and a variance from Section 12 -78 -12 (Height), Town Code, to allow for an addition, located at 225 Wall Street 1 Lot B, Block 5C Vail Village 1 51 Filing. Applicant: Eugene Fahey, represented by Mark O'Bryan, Architect Planner: Allison Ochs Allison Ochs made a presentation per the staff memorandum. John Schofield clarified which dormer is being referred to as dormer 1 and dormer 2 in the memorandum. Mark O'Bryan, Architect, presented an overview of the request. He noted that they have reduced the scale of their proposal to minimize the deviation from the code. The reasons for this request include the exterior unattractiveness of the existing building and the design of the existing interior spaces of this dwelling unit. He noted that this unit is in a prominent location in this building and that they are attempting to re- orient the windows to bring a sense of order to the exterior of the building. He noted that the building is currently non - conforming. with regards to the Town's height limits. He noted that the existing roof is long and monolithic and does not meet the intent of the Vail Village Master Plan and is not attractive to pedestrians and adjacent properties. He noted that the proposed dormers and gables do fit the character of the Village, as well as the goal of the Vail Village Master plan to promote redevelopment within the Village. He noted that it is unlikely that a developer would be willing to purchase this entire building at a premium from its several owners only to build a smaller building than already exists. He noted that from an architectural sense, skylights may not be the best solution to addressing their needs for additional light in this unit. He also noted that many other buildings in the neighborhood also exceed the Town's height limits, and then noted that the proposed dormers will not block any views that are not already blocked by the existing roof line. Eugene Fahey identified their intent is to convert these old weekend dwelling units into a permanent year -round home. He noted that this dormer will not negatively impact the adjacent properties and that they intend to upgrade this unattractive building to conform to the Bavarian look of the other buildings in the area. 0 Wales Madden, representing the Bell Tower Building homeowner's association, stated that Approved 718102 they at first feared that this proposal would block their views. However, after further examining the proposed plans, they said they wished to withdraw their objection to the proposal. 0 Erickson Shirley, asked about the proposed fireplace location on the north end to the building. Mark O'Bryan explained the proposed relocation of the fireplace. Erickson Shirley questioned how conforming and non - conforming structures are treated in terms of granting a variance. George Lamb expanded on the history of the development and redevelopment of this building. He noted the need to promote the redevelopment of existing buildings to be more in conformance with the design goals of the master plans. He noted concerns about the view impact to the neighbors. Rollie Kjesbo stated his wish that this building was originally constructed in compliance with codes, but recognized the hardship created by the non- conformity. He said his main concern is the impact to the adjacent properties. Erickson Shirley questioned the applicant as to why a variance should be approved for the living room dormer. Mark O'Bryan responded by explaining the need for an aesthetic improvement to the building and that this is the best solution to address this need. John Schofield responded that existing non - conforming structures have been found to be justification for variances in the past. He noted similar variances being granted for Pepi's, but did question whether or not this was the minimum amount necessary for a variance. Erickson Shirley asked if aesthetics is a consideration in a request of this nature. Allison Ochs noted that the Major Exterior Alteration considers aesthetics, however, the height variance does not take aesthetics into consideration. Mark O'Bryan expanded upon the interior ceiling design within the living room area, as viewed from the loft area and contended that this was the best solution to improve the appearance of the building from the interior and exterior of the building. Doug Cahill agreed with the intent to improve the exterior of the building. He asked the architect to further explain the proposed and existing living room area and stated that he would like to see a dormer, but not to the extent being proposed. Chas Bernhardt applauded the efforts of the applicant to improve the building. He noted that individuals need to simply deal with the constraints of the properties they purchase, however, he agreed that this proposal would improve the aesthetics of the building to conform to the intent of the Town objectives for the Village. He noted that the applicant and DRB need to pay special attention to the roofing materials being used on this project. John Schofield welcomed the applicants to Vail and noted that they always have the option of appealing the PEC decision to the Town Council. He stated that the proposal would be a great aesthetic improvement to the building, however, variances should only be approved for the minimum amount necessary. He said he is supportive of the variance for the dormer of the bedroom loft to bring the room into compliance with building and fire codes. He also feels that the existing building is a hardship in itself for the variance for the dormer over the living room. Chas Bernhardt made a motion to approve the variance for the bedroom dormer. 3 Approved 718102 George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion was passed by a vote of 6 -0. 0 Chas Bernhardt made a motion to approve the major exterior alteration for the bedroom dormer. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -0. Chas Bernhardt made a motion to approve the variance for the living room dormer, with the condition that it be reviewed by the DRB. George Lamb seconded the motion. Allison Ochs recommended that the item be tabled to allow to the applicant time to lesson the impact of the proposed dormer. Chas Bernhardt noted that he wanted to approve this as proposed, to set a maximum height limit for the proposed dormer. It was approved by a vote of 4 -2 with Erickson Shirley and Doug Cahill opposed. Chas Bernhardt made a motion to approve the major exterior alteration for the living room dormer. George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 -1, with Erickson Shirley opposed. 4. A request for a variance from Sections 12 -14 -7 (Setback from Watercourse) and 12- 15 -5C5 (Guideline Compliance), Vail Town Code.. tc allow for an addition within the 50 ft. Gore Creek setback and to allow for the continuance of a non - conforming driveway, located at 5175 Black Gore Drive, Unit B -1 /Cedar Point Townhomes Filing 2. Applicant: John Welaj, represented by Mike Suman Planner: Allison Ochs Allison Ochs made a presentation, per the staff report. John Welaj, representing himself, stated that he is looking for additional space and wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to expand into tract A. He stated that all the units extend into the Gore Creek setback requirement and he desires to keep the addition architecturally streamlined. He then brought attention to the second page of the attachments which displays the large tree as an asterisk. He discussed the root system of the tree and desire to preserve the tree. He said the current beams and walls limited the options and this proposal represents the best solution to achieve additional space. Kip Hughes identified herself as the president of the homeowner association and stated that the association did not have a strong opinion on the variance request or objection. • John Schofield asked if the parking area is common to all nine units? 0 Ms. Hughes stated that the area was common. John Schofield asked if the association was interested in paying to pave the area in future? 4 Approved 718102 Ms. Hughes responded with a negative. 0 Doug Cahill asked if Mr. Welaj approached the homeowner association with the request? Mr. Welaj stated that in May he attended the association meeting in Denver and stated that he is the only owner living in Vail and through several meetings he tried to get his ducks in a row. Doug Cahill asked if other owners were aware of the limitations on requesting a 250 addition? Mr. Welaj stated that he and the other end unit were special, in that they had additional land on the end units. Ms. Hughes stated that the 250 addition was a discussion in regards to the other units and she explained that the center units owned property in front and behind the units, Doug Cahill discussed the need to pave the parking /driveway area at some point. Chas Bernhardt asked if there was no need for a variance, would the site need to come into compliance'( .. . Allison Ochs responded that if an addition were approved with or without a variance that the site would need to come into compliance. George Lamb suggested exploring all options, rather than expanding into the setback. He pointed out that the tree appeared to be near the end of its fife and may be an option for removal. He suggested doing more cantilever if the tree was deemed to be worth saving. He stated that there needs to be something in place to trigger the paving of the area and suggested getting back with the association and working out a plan. Rollie Kjesbo stated that he wanted to see the complex paved. He added that he wasn't aware of another complex, which did not have pavement_ Allison Ochs stated that she was unaware of another nine -plea without pavement. She suggested that Mr. Welaj could pave a portion of the driveway /parking area. Mr. Shirley asked for clarification on the 250 ordinance, in regards to the paving requirement of the 250 ordinance. He feels that this is a special situation which may not fit the 250 ordinance_ Because the center units are not eligible for the 250 ordinance, he feels that this applicant should not be held to the paving requirement. John Schofield asked how many parking spaces are required? Allison Ochs responded that approximately two spaces per unit, depending on the unit size. John Schofield asked if staff would be satisfied with the pavement of the area of two spaces and if that was acceptable. Mr. Ruther responded that staff feels that more than two spaces need to be paved, such as the approach. He added that he feels that the center units would be eligible for the 250 ordinance. John Schofield asked how practical that is? Mr. Ruther feels that it is possible. Mr. Shirley asked why a unit with a paved driveway was given the option for a 250 sq. ft- expansion. 5 Approved 718102 George Lamb stated that it was a way to bring thing into compliance, such as above ground lines etc. Mr. Ruther read the first sentence of the 250 ordinance. Allison Ochs brought up that many of these 250 applications have other non - conformities with the Design Guidelines, for example, exterior floodlights. John Schofield asked if the applicant would like to table the application, in order to go to the homeowner association to explore the paving issue. Mr. Welaj stated that it isn't feasible of him, or fair to the homeowner association to pay for the paving. Mr. Lamb restated that he was just looking for the homeowner association to develop a plan to pave the lot; i.e., three requests for expansion. W .grhnfiold ctatpd that it is an nptinn to tnhla to amid nnssihle d�?ninl of the annlir�atinn Mr. Shirley suggested that Mr. Welaj pave the first ninth at the entrance. Rollie Kjesbo disagreed that that was a good idea, for the reason of endurance and time. Mr. Ruther suggested putting some parking area back into landscaping, as he feels that the parking area is much larger than that required by Code. Mr. Lamb stated that the board and Town was not holding the association and Mr. Welaj hostage, but that a better solution was needed. Doug Cahill made a motion to table the variance regarding the paving of the driveway. George Lamb seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -0. Doug Cahill made a motion to deny the requested setback variance, with the findings on page two. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion_ Chas Bernhardt suggested getting the tree examined. The motion passed by a vote of 6 -0. 5. A request for a variance from Section 11- 4B -12B (4) Vail Town Code, to allow for a banner, located at 141 East Meadow Drive /Lot P, Block 5D, Vail Village 1 Filing. Applicant: The Baggage Cheque Planner: George Ruther George Ruther gave a presentation per the memo. The applicant was not present and there was no public input. Mr. Lamb stated that he was disappointed that the applicant was not present, or attempted to work through the previous guidance. He added that the board was conscious of the 6 Approved 7/8/02 economics of doing business in Town, Rollie Kjesbo had no additional comments. 40 Mr. Shirley stated that if more businesses asked for similar signs, it would detract from the Town. Doug Cahill had no comment. Chas Bernhardt agreed with Mr. Lamb. Rollie Kjesbo made a motion to deny the variance with the findings on page three. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. Unanimous disapproval 6. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, of a text amendment to Title 12, Section 2 -2, to amend the definition of "Fraction Fee Club" and to amend Title 12, Section 16 -7A -8, to amend the Use Specific Criteria & Standards, and setting forth details in regard thereto. Applicant: Rob Levine Planner: George Ruther Mr. Ruther made a presentation per the memo. Mr. Levine stated that if the Board agreed with the staff recommendation, he would be returning with a conditional use application. Mr. Shirley asked if Mr. Levine had spoken to the other unit owners about this change to ownership of some remaining units. Mr. Ruther clarified that the Antlers Condo Association owns the units, as it is before the Board with this request. Doug Cahill asked for some clarification from a previous meeting regarding the number of units which could be quarter share units. Mr. Ruther stated that the number of units is not regulated by the Code. Mr. Schofield suggested that what was being proposed did not fit any of the definitions for time -share type ownership. Mr. Lamb asked if the homeowner association was aware how economic shifts can affect these types of arrangements in ownerships. Mr. Levine stated that risk exists whether there is one or four owners. Mr. Schofield asked Mr. Ruther if he agreed that the intention was to regulate use, not operation. Mr. Ruther agreed. Mr. Schofield asked what was being requested of the Board. Mr. Ruther stated that staff was looked for a statement regarding interpretation and implementation. He added that he would like to hear comments on the criteria for the 7 Approved 718102 conditional use of time -share type units and fractional fee ownership. Mr. Shirley asked if staff would be bringing changes to the Code back to the Board. Mr. Ruther stated, yes. 40 Mr. Schofield stated for the record, that there was no public present. Doug Cahill stated to fix it. He stated that he would be seeing Rob again at a later date for the conditional use permit and would like to see the wording fixed. George Lamb had nothing to add. Rollie Kjesbo had nothing to add, except to simplify it. Erickson Shirley said George did a great job clarifying the issue and to continue with the changes as recommended by staff. ehn Crh0f1e!d cnokp 2bo the prininal nnn]iratjnn of F I_Ig at the- Austria H uG. HP ctatpra _ that he believed that the uses should be separated. He stated that he wanted to further explore the distinction and at what point the Town should be out of these issues. He stated that if we are going to go through with this, we should explore it in other zone districts. He stated that the issue was clear in his mind in that we need clearer distinctions between each type of ownership. He stated that he wasn't sure if we should have specific numbers regarding ownership intervals. He sees an overlap in the definitions. He can't emphasize enough that when they origina!iy looked at FFU, there was a definite intent to keep a distinction between FFU and TSU. Fie said we should thinking about it as it relates to an SDD. Likewise.. if there are state statutes and we should be looking at those for direction, assuming that we do not have a need to do something dramatically different. He supports George's recommendation, and wants to see the specific language. He then stepped down as chair, making Erickson Shirley chair so John could make the motion. John Schofield made a motion with the findings on pages 7 and 8 of the staff memorandum and an affirmation of the staff's interpretation. Doug Cahill seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 -0. 7. A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the adoption of two view corridors within Lionshead and to amend Section 12 -22 -4 (Adoption of View Corridors), Vail Town Code to include View Corridors 1 and 2 in Title 12, as identified within the Lionshead Redevelopment Master Flan. View Corridor 1 is located approximately at the main pedestrian exit looking southwest towards the Gondola lift line. View Corridor 2 is located approximately from the pedestrian plaza at the east end of the Lifthouse Lodge looking south up the Gondola lift line. A more specific legal description of the two view corridors is on file at the Community Development Department. Applicant: Town of Vail Planner: Allison Ochs Allison Ochs presented an overview of the staff recommendation. Mr. Schofield asked if the maps Ms. Ochs was pointing too were to scale. 401 Ms. Ochs stated that they were not to scale, but that she could have a map made with the building lines shown. Approved 718102 Mr. Schofield was concerned that construction could occur all the way to the building line which might obstruct the views. He stated he needed a map which would show setbacks or build -to lines in order to make a determination. The map should also show the height limitations and step back in the Lionshead Master Plan. Mr. Ruther asked what the purpose was of putting the setbacks on the picture as the setbacks exist. Mr. Schofield stated he wanted to be assured that the Town was not stepping on any toes. Mr. Ruther stated that the Town has stepped on toes in other areas in order to preserve the corridors. Mr. Shirley restated that he wanted to see the building lines on the maps. Doug Cahill made a motion to table this item. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of b -u (Chas was not present). 8. Approval of June 10, 2002 minutes (tabled) 9. Information Update Mr. Forrest presented meeting dates for the Vail Village Streetscape Design Project Doug will not be present at the July 8 meeting Mr. Shirley asked staff to review the GFRA policy to see if the Town was being overly difficult. Staff stated that could visit the issue but it would take some time as the slate is full. Mr. Kjesbo cautioned causing more problems by eliminating the GFRA policy. Mr. Schofield asked that staff return with a history for educational purposes in a time period which fits the work load of the staff. Mr. Forrest stated that he could look at the issue and return in several months. Mr. Shirley stated that staff should bring any issue to the board if they think there is a better way. He added that some down valley communities are easier on homeowners. Doug Cahill made a motion to adjourn. Rollie Kjesbo seconded the motion. The motion passed by a vote of 5 -0 (Chas left earlier). • 9