Loading...
PZC Minutes 11-17-2009 (2)fill Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes for November 17, 2009 VON Avon Town Council Chambers Meetings are open to the public Avon Municipal Building / One Lake Street C O L O R A D O REGULAR WORK SESSION (5:00pm — 5:30pm) Discussion of Regular Meeting agenda items. Open to the public REGULAR MEETING (5:30pm) Call to Order The meeting was called to order at approximately 5:30 pm. It. Roll Call All Commissioners were present. 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 • Approval of the November 3, 2009 Meeting Minutes Action: Commissioner Struve moved to approve the consent agenda, as amended. Commissioner Roubos seconded the motion and it passed 5-0, with commissioners Green and Lane abstained due to their absence from the previous meeting. ZONING VI. Agave Setback Variance Property Location: Lot 3, Block 3, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision / 1060 W. Beaver Creek Boulevard Applicant: Richard Wheelock / Owner: Vail Tenure LLC Description: A variance request to construct an enclosed storage shed within the 10 foot rear lot setback and easement. The shed would be approximately 90 feet in length and encroach 8 feet into the setback. Discussion: Jared Barnes highlighted the Variance request, which includes the construction of an enclosure within the 10' setback and easement. The "lot setback" definition was read to the Commission. Jared presented information regarding other variances granted in Town, and, more specifically, in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. The only variance from a zoning standard in the area was for a garage structure to be located within the setback at Bridgewater Terrace. Jared clarified the intent of the language in the report with regard to the potential impacts to the health, safety, and welfare of residents. After discussions with the Town of Avon Chief Building Official related to this review criteria, it was determined that this would not create an undue impact on health, safety, or welfare; rather, the encroachment could impact the way in which occupants of the building exit or enter the back of the building. 1r4 Commissioner Green questioned if letters of utility signoff had been requested by staff. Staff responded that staff requires letters from all utilities that could be impacted. Green questioned if the Variance was for the entire length of the tenant's space. Jared deferred to the applicant for a detailed explanation of the request. Commissioner Struve asked if the improvements were not located "on the ground" whether or not it would require a variance. Jared responded that, yes, it would still require variance approval because the setback and easement are three-dimensional and the proposed addition is not located on the approved PUD development plan. Commissioner Roubos asked if the easement and setback were one of the same. Matthew Gannett responded that they are different, but encompass the same physical space. Commissioner Prince questioned if the encroachment would be further than the other structures in the photos attached to the staff report. Richard Wheelock responded that it would be about one foot further out than what is shown in the provided photographs. For the record, it was clarified that the application was noticed and no written comments were received by staff. Richard Wheelock presented the history of the property, and the necessity for existing mechanical equipment immediately adjacent to kitchen space of his unit. Richard explained how the north side of the property is always icy and there is a true danger for falling snow and ice off of that portion of the building. During the winter months most of the tables and chairs are moved outside to convert the indoor space into a nightclub. At the end of the night all of the items are moved back inside. After discussions Richard Wheelock had with Carol Mulson, Deputy Fire Chief, it was determined that bringing tables and chairs outside and covering them was not safe because it causes a life -safety issue and fire hazard. It was determined that the items would either need to be moved somewhere else inside, or a fire rated structure would need to be constructed to house the furniture. Since moving items around inside did not provide a safe option, or allow for enough room, the latter was preferred. Richard questioned whether or not this would be a "special privilege", in light of the residential garage structure that was approved in a setback at Bridgewater Terrace. He explained that there are a lot of non -conforming structures in the area of the proposed variance and he would like to "clean up" the area and bring it all into conformance at this time. Richard continued by reviewing other options for re -locating these items: outside on the highway 6 side, or other places inside the unit. The highway 6 side would not work due to the stacking of materials on the patio or in front of the property, and the ability to stack tables and chairs on the inside is hampered because of the resultant instability of such stacks. The applicant went over the two consent letters from utility companies that have been received, and stated that others are still pending. The safety issue was revisited, and Richard explained that the Fire District and Building Departments are actually more in favor of the proposed structure as a solution to continuing with his business. Commissioner Roubos asked whether or not walls were being proposed. Richard explained that it is a shed roof with walls. Half of the area is a storage area and the other half is simply to cover the equipment that already exists. Richard explained that the area would be fully accessible for exiting and access. The Commission asked if other utility companies would need to sign off on this proposal and staff responded in the affirmative. Richard stated that Excel was o.k. so long as Richard would pay for any future movements of utilities, if required. He also stated that the water district said the same thing. Holy Cross visited the site and noticed the adjacent landscaping and stated that in the future they would likely relocate their utility to another location if possible. 14 Commissioner Green questioned how much had to be moved in and out each night. Richard responded that approximately 80 chairs, 20 tables, and some booths are moved for each event. Commissioner Prince again questioned the requirement to cover the furniture imposed by the fire department. Richard said that it must be a dry -walled structure with at least a 1 hour rating. The Public hearing was opened and closed with no public comment. Commissioner Prince began the deliberations by talking about the safety issues raised by staff. He felt that this was actually a safer solution that the existing conditions, and is more open to the request than when he first read staffs report. Commissioner Lane stated that he sees the application as a black -and -white issue and is not in favor of the variance given the fact that a similar situation would likely not gain approval in a residential setting. Commissioner Anderson said the proposed use requiring the variance would be generally a better benefit, and any utility company could come and remove all or portions of the improvements at a later time. He felt that this is not a good practice and could be used against the Commission as a precedent by others in the vicinity with new construction. Commissioner Green went on to say the diagram proposed by the applicant did not accurately depict the entire story and is not as simple as represented by the applicant. He considers this as more than just a land -use issue; it is also a safety issue with respect to responding to the Fire District's request to provide access behind the building. These would be code required fire assemblies and this would be a safety issue. Additionally, this would be a protective canopy to keep items from injuring people from objects falling from the roof. Commissioner Green was still unsure how all of the storage and exiting would work based on the information presented. He explained that there is insufficient information to act on the request, based on the operational/use basis before saying yes or no to the request. He also felt there would be specific code issues that needed to be included in the application. Commissioner Struve recognized the safety issues that are present, and would like to support the use; however, he requested additional information before he can make an opinion one way or another. Commissioner Roubos expressed her original lack of support for the request, but after hearing the merits of the proposal from the applicant, she was more in favor. Additional information on how the structure will look would be helpful to know exactly what the variance approval would accomplish. Letters from the Fire District and neighboring properties would be extremely helpful in her opinion. The Chairman, Todd Goulding, highlighted the 4 criteria for granting a variance and went over the required findings for any variance request. He explained that variances are to be issued only when a clear hardship is demonstrated by an applicant. He did not see a hardship because of the setback. If the request was for a 3' encroachment to protect utilities, etc he might see the hardship. The degree to which the variance was being requested was the issue at hand and setbacks were there for a reason. Mr. Goulding said that the neighboring property owners all must adhere to the same rear setback requirement and this variance could negatively impact other properties and their ability to improve their properties. Action: Commissioner Struve moved to table the request in order for further details and to give the applicant a chance to respond to concerns of the commission that will take into account issues heard at the meeting. The vote was seconded by Commissioner Roubos. The vote passed with a 4-3 vote. *14 DESIGN REVIEW VII. Wildstar Single-family Residences Applicant: Jeffrey Manley, Martin Manley Architects/ Owner. • Wildavon Enterprises, LLC Description: A sketch design proposal to build phase I of the Wildstar development, which will include three (3) single-family homes with a shared driveway off Wildwood Road. Each dwelling unit would measure approximately 2,200 square feet. Discussion: Matt Pielsticker briefly discussed the history of the project. He also discussed the proposal and its phasing. Commission dialogue then ensued at the chamber conference table while discussing the proposed sketch design. Commissioner Green commented on property lines, phasing, and the need for more differentiation. Commissioner Anderson stated that visual differentiation among the homes will be important. He also commented on that the proposed landscaping and grading would need to blend the structures into the existing landscape. Commissioner Lane questioned the appearance of the proposed elevations and their apparent lack of visual, architectural interest. Commissioner Prince stated that he likes the project. Although, he also stated he would like to see the colors modified. He also thought the application had similarities with other projects in town. Commissioner Struve commented on the viability of single-family homes. As this is a Sketch Design application, no formal action is required. VIII. Other Business • Review of Public Works CIP at next meeting • Trails Committee • Potential Public Benefits • Mike Farr's Solar Panels IX. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:30pm. Approved on DecemberM W. Todd Goulding Chairperson 0 t�41� Phil Struve . �/�l / Secretary