Loading...
PZC Minutes 03-16-201011 REGULAR MEETING Call to Order 5:35pm Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes for March 16, 2010 II. Roll Call Commissioner Lane was absent. III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda None IV. Conflicts of Interest Commissioner Anderson disclosed a conflict of Interest with Item VI. Sketch Design Review for the H.A. Nottingham Park Pavilion. He will abstain from any comments or action on this item at Final Design review. V. Consent Agenda Approval of the February 16, 2010 Meeting Minutes • Approval of the March 2, 2010 Meeting Minutes Action: Feb 16d' Minutes — With amendments, Commissioner Struve moved to approve the February 16th minutes, and all Commissioners were in favor. March 2nd — With amendments, Commissioner Struve moved to approve the March 2nd, 2010 meeting minutes, and all Commissioners were in favor. DESIGN REVIEW VI. Sketch Design - H.A. Nottingham Park Pavilion Property Location: Tract G, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision / One Lake St Applicant: Stephanie Lord -Johnson, VAg / Owner: Town of Avon Description: Sketch Design review for a performing arts pavilion, to be located on the north side of the municipal building. Discussion: Justin Hildreth, Town Engineer, explained the background of the project and the direction from Council. Stephanie Lord -Johnson presented the design of the stage and the programming for the project. Stephanie walked through the materials and colors for the project and how they arrived at the current proposal. Commissioner Prince asked if there would be any heat. Stephanie stated that there could be radiant heat provided to the slab floor. Commissioner Anderson questioned the height of the structure. Stephanie stated that the height is approximately 31'. Commissioner Green asked if their have been modifications to the original programming of the project. Justin responded that at the first design included a promenade, but that element was dropped out. Commissioner Prince questioned the size of the stage and how it compared to other venues in the area such as Eagle, Ford, etc. Justin stated that it was much smaller than the Ford, and larger than Eagle's stage. Stephanie responded that it depends more on the type of band and what there requirements were. Commissioner Green felt that the siting did not make sense, and mentioned that if it were required to be moved in the future then the element of permanency would need to be addressed. Commissioner Green thought the design was fine. Commissioner Green thought that it was a quality space, and the materiality is good. He stated that this was a descent architectural statement. Commissioner Struve mentioned that if the stage were to be placed in any other place in the park it would take up park space. Commissioner Goulding hit on the fact that sound amplification can be anywhere in the park, and wanted to better understand the site lines, how amplification worked in the current location, and felt that a larger site plan could benefit the review. Stephanie stated that they did try to open up the stage as much as possible by pushing back the wing walls. This was a result of further studies in the park and looking at aerial photographs. Commissioner Struve was concerned that this could be an attractive nuisance for citizens that could set up there own instruments at night, such as with the stage in Boulder. He thought that the applicant did a good job making the most of the project. Commissioner Prince was concerned that we are working under a constrained budget and this design process should be more geared towards long term visioning. Justin Hildreth explained that the Council supported an "Enhanced" version of the design since the bare bones design was not quite appropriate for the park. Commissioner Goulding directed the Commission to focus on the design application instead of the programming. Commissioner Prince was concerned with the pillars and the relationship to the large backdrop. Stephanie explained that the wing walls were to be layered with possibly a patina finished copper. Commissioner Prince questioned the clear story windows in the upper rear portion of the stage. Stephanie explained that they are still speaking to the acoustical engineer and they wanted to keep the roof of the stage as lofty as possible. Additional light form the south would be a benefit to the stage Commissioner Anderson stated that he would hold his comments due to a conflict of interest. Commissioner Roubos stated that it probably meets the design guidelines, but she is somewhat disappointed with the structure because it lacks interest. She said we may be jumping the gun because we cannot afford the stage today, and it would be nice to see the master plan and the big picture for the park and the Town in general before committing to this design. Commissioner Goulding explained what he thought would help sell this is and that would be the richness of the materials and how it will be viewed from all perspectives, including coming down from Beaver Creek. He questioned the bottom of the roof and if there were acoustical coffers. Stephanie explained that the warmth of the wood and copper and stone is the intention of the project. Commissioner Goulding wanted more clarification at final design for how the rake edge and fascia boards tie in. He questioned the flooring, and Stephanie responded that the intent is a colored slab, but it needs to be something solid to stand up to the weather. Stephanie stated that performers would have the ability to come in and put a wood floor over the slab if they wanted to. Commissioner Goulding wanted to know if it was real stone or cultured. Stephanie clarified that it is real and is to match other Lake Street and Transportation center improvements. Commissioner Goulding wanted more details on lighting and signage and wanted to know exactly what are we going to see. Commissioner Struve asked Larry Brooks if there was a possibility of naming rights from a sponsor, would that be pursued by Town? Larry responded negatively. \1 Commissioner Goulding concurred with staffs report and asked if we could see what parking could be for the project. Action: No action for Sketch Design Plans. WORK SESSION VII. Transportation Master Plan Visioning (5:30pm) Description: Final review of the Mission Statements complied during the previous two meetings. Discussion: Sally explained that if endorsement could be reached then at the next meeting a resolution would be brought forth for a final motion. The Commission went through each mission statement individually and made additional edits. Action: Commissioner Struve moved to endorse the vision statements, as edited by the Commission. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Green and all Commissioners were in favor. VIII. Unified Land Use Code (6:30pm) Description: Review of the Residential Design Standards. Discussion: Sally Vecchio briefed the Commission on where the Unified Code process stands today, and why we are reviewing the Design Standards in advance of the entire Code. There will be a March 23`d Joint Meeting with the Town Council to hand off the entire document. Sally presented a PowerPoint slideshow highlighting the new baseline standards. Commissioner Green questioned if the standards applied to all residential development. Staff responded that the first part of the document was generally applicable to all residential development, and then there is an additional layer of requirements for duplex and multifamily design review. Commissioner Green was concerned with a performance based set of requirements. The differentiation between prescriptive based versus performance based requirements was discussed. Commissioner Goulding explained that prescriptive requirements would be like those for Bachelor Gulch's design regulations. Commissioner Goulding explained that Staff would go through photographs of different developments in Town, and the Commission would see what we definitely do not like. More importantly, we need to express why we do not want to see certain design elements and that could give Staff direction for further refinements to the requirements. For example, Commissioner Goulding felt that walk outs should be required for stepped buildings so that the end result is not an 8' tall blank wall or a retaining wall to meet the ground. Commissioner Green asked if we should be precluding flat roofs all together. Commissioner Roubos stated that she too was also concerned with the prescriptive nature of the requirements as drafted. She explained that the roof and building material requirements are too limited for general applicability. Commissioner Struve questioned if it was o.k. to have flat roofs in Town Center. Commissioner Goulding stated that if we did not prescribe pitched roofs that we would be challenged with a max height and flat roof design at that max height. Commissioner Green questioned if there truly was a way to regulate "good" design. Commissioner Struve brought up the example of Carefree, Arizona, where every building looks the same, and that it is not all good or bad but not great design. Commissioner Green led the discussion as the Commission reviewed different photographs of constructed projects in Town. He broke the review of each design into the following general categories: Compatibility with the neighborhood with respect to color, materials, & vernacular Bottom level walkouts, and steep development Landscaping and Grading Side lot to side lot guidelines Benching Non -repeating facades There was a discussion about requiring stepped foundation requirements. The Commission reviewed photographs of Bridgewater Terrace. Commissioner Green questioned what are natural colors? Sally responded that there would be a design notebook made from the new code and the existing design guidelines will all but be eliminated after codification. There could be color palettes included in the notebook to guide developers. Commissioner Goulding questioned if there should there be wider latitude with respect to the Code? Commissioner Struve questioned if we should allow detached garages? Commissioner Green felt that if they are not separated and they are indeed attached for multifamily structures, what is it that we want? He felt that we want good design and integrated garages. Sally explained what we are trying to get to with the requirements for detached garages and that is requiring additional articulation and appropriately located. Commissioner Green clarified that you should not stack floor plans with repetitious windows. Commissioner Anderson stated that the necessity for stone on buildings should not be a requirement in the Avon Development Code. Commissioner Prince questioned if snowplowing is to be a major consideration for design review, with concerns to landscape islands between single car garages. Commissioner Green is hesitant to put material or colors into the requirements. This was more of a legislative approach. Sally Vecchio questioned if ridgelines should be prescribed to the point of a linear distance of 30' maximum as drafted, or a percentage. Commissioner Green asked the Commission what there interpretation of an architectural feature was. The response was a contrast in form, not all hard lines; window forms, fenestration, decks, inset windows, columns, timber, and stepping of facades The "front porch" concept was discussed as it related to the Courtyard Villas project. There was a discussion between purposefulness vs. arbitrary. Commissioner Prince stated that the entire structure must hold together in a complete composition. Commissioner Green wants to encourage 3D models for all submittals given the great technology that is out there today for architects. The Commissioners felt that the garage cannot be the dominating feature from the street, and that less emphasis should be on the garage. It should be subdued. There may be a differentiation between requirements for colors and auto dependent design from Wildridge and the valley floor. The hardship of expense for better design was discussed. It was agreed that the Town has typically backed down when better design could only result with more expense to the applicant. Action: No Action. Through April we will be spending a couple hours each meeting devoted to the ULUC. The Work program for PZ review will be developed. Only the larger topics will be discussed in detail, and a page by page review of the document is not envisioned. IX. Other Business March 23rd Joint Work Session with Town Council X. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:50pm Approved on April 6, W. ... Goulding Chairperson S9==VJ, —