PZC Minutes 02-15-2005 (2)Minutes of Planning and Zoning Commission
February 15, 2005
Council Chambers
Town of Avon Municipal Building
400 Benchmark Road
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 5:35 pm.
II. Roll Call
All Commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioner Smith.
III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda
There were no additions or amendments to the agenda.
IV. Conflicts of Interest
There were no conflicts of interest to disclose.
V. Consent Agenda
Commissioner Karow motioned for the approval of the Minutes from the February
1st, 2005, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting; Commissioner Didier
seconded and the motion passed 5-1 with Commissioner Savage abstaining due
to his absence at the meeting..
VI. Special Review Use — Drive through Bank — PUBLIC HEARING
Property Location: Lot 22-13, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Subdivision/245 Chapel Place (Chapel Square, Building C) — Resolution
05-02
Applicant/Owner's Representative: Greg Gastineau
Description: Greg Gastineau is requesting a Special Review Use (SRU) Permit to
allow for the use of a drive -up teller window for the future site of a Wells Fargo
Bank. The drive -up teller would gain access just south of the Outback
Steakhouse Monument sign at the access road behind City Market. Drive -up
teller windows are not specifically allowed in the Chapel Square PUD, therefore a
SRU permit is required. This agenda item is a Public Hearing.
Eric Heidemann presented the Staff Report to the Commission and asked for an
additional condition be added to the Staff Report that the Applicant should apply
for a Minor Subdivision to remove easements along the property line.
Commissioner Didier questioned the property line issue and the driveway width.
Greg Gastineau approached the podium as representative for the Applicant. He
commented that he has read the Staff Report and can adequately address the
CADocumcnts and Settingsltkatieb\L.ocal SettingsWempomry Intemet FileAOLK2\021505.DOC
Page I of 7
issues including the property line. He continued with the length of the driveway
as an issue of entrance and exit and not stacking.
No public response.
Public Hearing Opened
Public Hearing Closed
Commissioner review was positive to the project. Commissioner Struve
questioned the commercial and public lanes and expressed the public
convenience was a good factor. Commissioner Evans commented that the
project meets the criteria for Special Review Use, it meets the Town's zoning
codes, and the use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive Plan and it
was compatible with adjacent uses.
Commissioner Savage motioned for approval of Item VI, Special Review Use —
Drive through Bank, Property Location: Lot 22-13, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver
Creek Subdivision/245 Chapel Place (Chapel Square, Building C) — Resolution
05-02, with staff's recommendations 1-3, plus the addition of the property line
condition. Commissioner Trueblood seconded and the motioned passed
unanimously.
VII. Sketch Design — Commercial Building Addition
Property Location: Lot 22-B, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Subdivision/245 Chapel Place (Chapel Square, Building C)
Applicant/Owner's Representative: Greg Gastineau
Description: In conjunction with a Special Review Use (SRU) application, the
applicant is proposing a sketch design plan to add a canopy and associated drive
through lanes for a drive up banking facility. The proposed drive through would
be located on the former "chapel" site, behind the City Market grocery store. All
materials and colors of the canopy would match the existing building to the south
(Lot 22-A), and the bank would occupy the entire first floor of the building.
Matt Pielsticker presented the Staff Report.
Commissioner Evans questioned the parking code and its relation to the drive up
situation. Eric Heidemann commented that if the parking spaces from the Chapel
Square were in surplus and it granted through a mixed-use clause when Chapel
Square was created. Commissioner Struve questioned the type of classification
of the structure and it was voiced that it classified as B occupancy - Business.
Greg Gastineau approached the podium as representative of the Applicant. He
mentioned that he saw no issues with Staff Report or the recommendations but
questioned Recommendation No. 5 of the staff report regarding the signage.
Matt Pielsticker responded that signage should be presented at,Final Design.
CADocuments and Settings\tkatieMocal SettingsWemporary Internet Res\0LK2W21505.D0C
Page 2 or 7
Mr. Gastineau continued with the easement and transformer were property of
Holy Cross Energy and his meetings with them concluded that a 6 -foot increased
width, 3 feet on both sides, of the canopy would straddle the transformer. Holy
Cross Energy would vacate the transformer, turned over to a private splice vault
for the electrical underground and accessible by manhole, move the easement
over to the north and place the transformer in the landscape area. Mr. Gastineau
was consulting with his architects to provide at Final Design the concerns of Holy
Cross Energy for Commission approval. Mr. Gastineau continued that trees,
which would be removed, would be relocated within the property perhaps on the
island created by the drive thru lanes.
Commissioner Didier commented that the flat roof was a concern and felt that
arches may enhance the project. Mr. Gastineau replied that most roofs in
Chapel Square were flat and the square design was for vehicle clearance.
Commissioner Evans mentioned that the arch could not be created in this
location. Commissioner Evans continued that the roof color could be more
appealing with the black removed and replaced with an earth tone and he
continued that the lighting was a concern and recommended recess fixtures.
Commissioner Trueblood commented that signage redundancy might be an
issued. Mr. Gastineau presented to the Commission the proposed signage that
still required Wells Fargo Corporate approval.
VIII. Minor Modification
Property Location: Lot 45C, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision/2520 Old Trail
Road, Applicant/Owner: Bob Mach
Description: Bob Mach has submitted a Minor Project for a design change to his
single-family project that is currently under construction in Wildridge. The
application proposes to eliminate the wrap around portion of the deck and to
reduce the size of the deck on the house by approximately 126 square feet.
Matt Pielsticker presented the Staff Report.
Commissioner Didier asked what the reasoning for the deck elimination. The
applicant was not presented and the application was opened up for
commissioner review.
Commissioner Savage began the discussion by commenting that this issue had
previously addressed by the Commission and voiced that Mr. Mach is looking for
this modification since he changed the design feature without Commission
approval and now is seeking approval for another design feature. In other words,
Mr. Mach put a fireplace where it didn't belong and now he needed to wrap a
deck around that elevation and it presents a fire hazard from the exhaust of the
fireplace.
Commissioner Evans commented that commissioner rationale should focus on
design guideline standards. Commissioner Struve voiced that the visual of the
CADocuments and SettingsltkatieMLocal ScttingsWempomry Intemet Files\OLK2\021505.DOC
Page 3 of 7
fireplace bump out required the deck. Commissioner Karow commented that the
firebox bump out and the wrap around deck help the code by adding additional
materials and satisfies design review considerations. Commissioner Trueblood
asked to abstain from this project due to previous conversation with the
applicant. Commissioner Evans agreed with Commissioner Struve and his
recollection of the original submittal. West elevation approval at previous design
review and does not believe that it is in conformance. Commissioner Evans
continued that the fireplace bump out is approximately 24 to 30 inches off the
wall and with the deletion of the deck, there is no bump out grounding, its an
appendage stuck on the wall and makes no sense architecturally. At the time of
the last review of this project, the Commission approved the two new fireplace
bump outs, one on the west elevation and one on the east elevation that came
out on the ground and granted approval on the west elevation with the condition
that the deck remain in place and wrap around the project.
Commissioner Savage motioned for denial of Item VII, Minor Modification, Lot
45C Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision/2520 Old Trail Road, ApplicantlOwner: Bob
Mach, with Commissioner Struve seconding the motion. The motion passed 4 to
1 with Commissioner Karow opposing and Commissioner Trueblood abstaining
due to exparte contact with the applicant.
XI. Comprehensive Plan Update
Description: Distribution of the February 9th Public Review Draft of the
Comprehensive Plan. Staff will provide the Commission with a summary of
proposed changes to the content, organization, and format of the Draft
Comprehensive Plan. Staff will also update the Commission on the scheduled
open house and upcoming public hearing dates. No action required.
Eric Heikemann presented his memo to the Commission. Dominic Mauriello,
representing Vail Resorts, approached the podium to address his comments that
were distributed in letterform to the Commission. Mr. Mauriello commented that
the "Red House" be eliminated as a historical structure from the Comprehensive
Plan as it does not lie within the Town of Avon boundaries and his clients are
concerned with the "gateway" image and may be prone to deed this building to
the Town of Avon at some point.
Commissioner Evans voiced that the "Red House" did not present any cultural or
historical relevancy to the Town of Avon. However, Commissioner Evans
pointed out that the Town via the Comprehensive Plans has the right to give
guidance and recommendations regarding parcels of land that are not within the
boundaries of the Town.
Other Business:
Eric Heidemann voiced to the Planning and Zoning Commission the concerns of
the Town Council concerns regarding fencing in the Design Guidelines. Tambi
CADocuments and SettingsltkatiebU=al Settingffempomry Internet Rcs\0LK2\021505.D0C
Page 4 of 7
Katieb commented that in a Joint Session between Town Council and Planning
and Zoning Commission, the subject of fences was opened. Mr. Katieb
mentioned that the guidelines needed to be strengthened with regard to fences
and wanted commissioner input prior to proceeding. Commissioner Evans
questioned the goal of Town Council in this area. Commissioner Karow voiced
that clarity was the issue in the fencing guidelines and continued with the his
recollection of the background that was in the original Wildridge PUD to allow the
deer to roam to per the desires of the National Forest Service. Commissioner
Didier commented that there would need to be areas that would conform to
fencing such as Eaglebend due to the railroad in its backyard. Commissioner
Evans reiterated the need for clarification and direction from Town Council on the
issue of fencing.
Commissioner Struve mentioned to the Commission that the Comprehensive
Plan include a comment on the 420 acres, West Avon Parcel, to be clear to the
Forest Service that it be developed as a recreational parcel. Commissioner
Karow voiced that other adjacent parcels be reviewed and documented in the
Plan.
Mrs. Bob Mach approached the podium, apologizing that her day-care parents
were late in picking up, to understand the denial of Mr. Mach's Modification
Application and to voice her opposition to the wrap around deck as a privacy
issue for the duplex next door. Bob Mach approached the podium with apologies
for arriving late due to a "crack-up" on Nottingham Road and asked for
understanding of the denial of his application. Commissioner Evans explained to
the Machs that it would take a motion to re -open the decision of the Commission
regarding this application. Commissioner Evans continued that the application
was denied with a 4 to 1 vote; Commissioner Trueblood abstained due to an
exparte contact that he felt would exclude him from voting on the application.
The consensus of the four commissioners that voted on denial that, at the time of
the last review of this project, there were numerous items re -approached for
approvals after the fact and after things had been changed. At that point in time,
the Planning and Zoning Commission had made a number of concessions with
regard to the design features of the home. Commissioner Evans continued that
specifically two items that were approved at the last project review, 2 new firebox
bump outs with one on the west elevation and one on the east elevation, and the
denial of the deck wrap around on the west elevation, which was to show support
for the bump out that was added by the builder without prior approval from the
Commission. It only made sense to have this bump out there if there is
something to support it. Right now, this bump out is hanging in mid air with no
grounding and no support and that is not supported by the Design Guidelines.
The maintaining of the deck as it wraps around as originally proposed and
approved by in the Final Design Review for this project adds that base and
grounding to make it look as if something is supporting that bump out. Based on
previous criteria, the anchoring and base of the bump out was again discussed
and decided by four members of the commission that the deck was needed there
CADocuments and Seltings\tkatieMocal SettingsMemporary Intemet Files\OLK2\021505.DOC
Page 5 of 7
to have the' design make sense and look like it is actually grounded and
supported by something. Mr. Mach voiced that if a buyer shows up; this buyer
should have the ultimate say in this issue and not an appointed board. Mr. Mach
continued by saying that it was his property and no one else can see it. The
Machs argued the decision of the Commission. Commissioner Evans again
repeated the format and foundation of this denial and mentioned a recourse
would be to appeal to Town Council the Planning and Zoning Commission
decision.
Commissioner Trueblood questioned Lot 61 and the changes that were proposed
by the owner, and asked why the Commission was not informed of the
condemnation earlier or a Commission person was not invited to sit in on the
Executive Session by the Council. Tambi Katieb responded that it was not within
his authorization to advise the Commission on the matter until it an offer was
made to the Owner of the subject property, also noting the frustration of the
applicant for Lot 61 with the timing. Mr. Trueblood was requested to discuss
Commissioner presence at Executive Session with the elected policy body.
Commissioner Trueblood voiced a failure of communication between Town
Council to P&Z, stating that the physical arrangement of the joint work session
was not conducive to a meaningful dialogue since he felt Council had to speak
down to the Commissioners.
Commissioner Karow questioned the condemnation criteria and process, and the
proposed use. Commissioner Evans mentioned that Al Williams was offered
compensation for the acquisition and has until 3/8 to respond. Commissioner
Evans noted that rationale behind the acquisition appeared to be a logical
location for transit, adjacent to the railroad.
Commissioner Struve wanted on record to show appreciation to Commissioner
Evans for his professional approach to a difficult situation regarding the
developer presentation at the joint work session meeting. Commissioner Didier
acknowledged the value of the joint work session and thought it still represented
a value to the developers to hear the concerns. Commissioner Evans
appreciated the session to better understand the Council vision and viewpoints
on Main Street and Lot 61.
Commissioner Trueblood mentioned the ease with which the Gates project
approval had occurred, and the new difficulty for Lot 61 regarding the timeline of
the project that has been pushed out. Mr. Katieb mentioned that a sketch plan
application could be on the table within the month since the Lot 61 project does
have entitlements at this time, and that it was up to the owner and developers to
determine whether a better project for the Town and themselves would cause a
PUD amendment. Commissioner Trueblood questioned the vision of Main Street
and whether it is reflected in the new Comp Plan. Tambi Katieb commented that
the Town Center plan considers the project and the Comprehensive Plan
acknowledges the public improvements required.
CADocuments and Settings4katieb\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fles\0LK2\021505.D0C
Page 6 or 7
Mr. Katieb continued with an update on anticipated Lot C PUD applications and
the forthcoming Confluence submission.
IX. Adjourn
Commissioner Evans made the motion to adjourn. Commissioner Trueblood
seconded and the motion was unanimously approved. The meeting adjourned at
7:15 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Ruth Weiss
Recording Secretary
APPROVED:
Chris Evans
Chairman
Andrew Karow 0—,,OQ
Vice Chairman
CADocuments and SettingA\tkatieMLocal SettingsWempomry Internet Files\0LK2\021505.D0C
Page 7 of