PZC Packet 0820191 Agenda posted on Friday, August 16, 2019 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
-Avon Municipal Building, Avon Recreation Center, Avon Public Library, Town of Avon Website www.avon.org
Please call 970-748-4023 for questions.
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, August 20, 2019
100 Mikaela Way – Avon Municipal Building
If you require special accommodation, please contact us in advance and we will assist you. You may call David McWilliams at 970-
748-4023 or email cmcwilliams@avon.org for special requests.
Note: The Avon Town Council has been invited to attend Item V, Village at Avon Work Session; therefore, a quorum of
the Avon Town Council may be present at this meeting.
I. Call to Order – 5:00pm
II. Roll Call
III. Conflicts of Interest
IV. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda
V. Work Session – Village at Avon Development Approval History
Summary: The Town Manager and Town Attorney will be on hand to present the background
and current regulatory landscape for the Village (at Avon) PUD and Subdivision. The
purpose of the work session is to familiarize the Commission, and Council, with the
governing documents and role of the different review bodies for different land use
proposals.
VI. Rezone – CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING – 420 West Beaver Creek Boulevard
File: REZ19001
Applicant: Town of Avon
Property: Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Summary: Proposal to change the zoning from Residential – High Density to Park.
VII. Work Session – Screening
Summary: Recent development applications have stretched the screening regulations
contained in code and staff suggests a conversation about potential improvement.
VIII. Consent Agenda
A – PZC Meeting Minutes – August 6, 2019
B – Record of Decisions:
1. File #AEC19004 and MNR19012, Alternative Equivalent Compliance and Minor Development Plan
for Lot 37B Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision / 5024 Wildridge Road East Unit B
2. File #SRU19001, Motion Rent A Car Special Review Use extension to File #SRU15004
Lot 18/19, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision / 281 Metcalf Road, Unit 107
IX. Staff Approvals
A. MNR19020 – Landscape at 2480 Saddle Ridge Loop
B. SGN19006 – Temporary Sign at First Bank
C. MNR19021 – Addition at 4015 Wildridge Road West
X. Adjourn
PZC Recommendations: #SRU19001 Page 1
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FINDINGS OF FACT AND DECISION
DATE OF DECISION: August 6, 2019
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Special Review Use
PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 18/19, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision / 281 Metcalf Road Unit 107
FILE NUMBER: SRU19001
APPLICANT: Vladimir Goregliad
This decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.24.060:
DECISION: Approval of the Special Review Use application with the following findings and conditions:
FINDINGS:
1. The modifications qualify as a Special Review Use pursuant to §7.16.1000 of the Development
Code;
2. The application is complete;
3. The application provides sufficient information to allow PZC to determine that the application
complies with the relevant review criteria;
4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
5. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity by
the Application;
6. The proposed use has a negligible impact to adjacent or on-site uses; and
7. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses in terms of scale, size and scope.
CONDITIONS:
1. The Special Review Use permit is granted to Motion Autohaus, LLC under ownership of
Vladimir Goregliad. Any change in ownership requires reapplication of the Special Review
Use; and
2. The Special Review Use expires on August 6, 2029.
THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED:
BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________
PZC Chairperson
PZC Record of Decision: #AEC19004 & MNR19012 Page 1 of 2
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION
DATE OF DECISION: August 6, 2019
TYPE OF APPLICATION: Alternative Equivalent Compliance & Minor Development Plan
PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 37B, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / 5024 Wildridge Road East Unit B
FILE NUMBER: AEC19004 & MNR19012
APPLICANT: Sunny and Kirby Koch
CASE #AEC19004 This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.120(b):
DECISION: Denial of the application with the following findings:
FINDINGS: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent Compliance; 2. The proposed alternative does not achieve the intent of §7.28.080 Fences to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The proposed alternative does not achieve the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 4. The proposed alternative does not result in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and 6. The proposed alternative imposes greater impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through compliance with the specific requirements of the Code.
CASE #MNR19012 This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.080(c):
DECISION: Approval of the development plan with the following findings:
FINDINGS: 1. The application is complete; 2. The modifications qualify as a Minor Development Plan pursuant to §7.16.080 of the Development Code. 3. The application and information presented at the hearing provides sufficient information to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application is in compliance with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 5. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity by the application; 6. The design of the fence does not relate the development to the character of the surrounding community; and 7. The propose design is characterized by a screen wall and not a fence.
PZC Record of Decision: #AEC19004 & MNR19012 Page 2 of 2
THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED:
BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________ PZC Chairperson
1 PZC Minutes – August 6, 2019
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, August 6, 2019
I. Call to Order – The meeting was called to order at 5:00 pm.
II. Roll Call – All Commissioners were present except for Commissioner Golembiewski.
III. Conflicts of Interest – No conflicts of interest were disclosed.
IV. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda – There were no additions or amendment to the agenda.
V. Alternative Equivalent Compliance and Minor Development Plan – CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING – 5024
Wildridge Road East Unit B
File: AEC19004 and MNR19012
Applicant: Kirby and Sonny Koch
Property: Lot 37B Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision
Summary: Application to allow a non-conforming privacy fence to be approved by PZC. The
fence is already built and does not conform to height or built characteristics required.
Action: Commissioner Dammeyer motioned to deny the AEC application with the following
findings:
1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent
Compliance;
2. The proposed alternative does not achieve the intent of §7.28.080 Fences to the
same or better degree than the subject standard;
3. The proposed alternative does not achieve the goals and policies of the Avon
Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard;
4. The proposed alternative does not result in benefits to the community that are
equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and
6. The proposed alternative imposes greater impacts on adjacent properties than would
occur through compliance with the specific requirements of the Code.
Commissioner Barnes seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 6-0.
Action: Commissioner Dammeyer motioned to approve the MNR application with the
following findings:
Findings:
1. The application is complete;
2. The modifications qualify as a Minor Development Plan pursuant to §7.16.080 of the
Development Code.
3. The application and information presented at the hearing provides sufficient
information to determine that the application complies with the relevant review
criteria;
4. The application and information presented at the hearing is in compliance with the
goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
5. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current
capacity by the application;
2 PZC Minutes – August 6, 2019
6. The design of the fence does not relate the development to the character of the
surrounding community; and
7. The propose design is characterized by a screen wall and not a fence.
Commissioner Howell seconded the motion and it carried 5-1 with commissioner
Nusbaum voting in opposition.
VI. Special Review Use – PUBLIC HEARING – 281 Metcalf Road unit 107
File: SRU19001
Applicant: Vladimir Goregliad
Property: Lot 18/19 Block 1 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Summary: Special Review Use to continue the Motion Rent A Car Business on the property.
Action: Commissioner Howell motioned to approve the item with the following findings and
conditions:
Findings:
1. The modifications qualify as a Special Review Use pursuant to §7.16.1000 of the
Development Code;
2. The application is complete;
3. The application provides sufficient information to allow PZC to determine that the
application complies with the relevant review criteria;
4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive
Plan;
5. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current
capacity by the Application;
6. The proposed use has a negligible impact to adjacent or on-site uses; and
7. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses in terms of scale, size and scope.
Conditions:
1. The Special Review Use permit is granted to Motion Autohaus, LLC under ownership
of Vladimir Goregliad. Any change in ownership requires reapplication of the Special
Review Use; and
2. The Special Review Use expires on August 6, 2029.
Commissioner Smith seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 6-0.
VII. Rezone – PUBLIC HEARING – 420 West Beaver Creek Boulevard
File: REZ19001
Applicant: Town of Avon
Property: Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Summary: Proposal to change the zoning from Residential – High Density to Park.
Action: Commissioner Barnes motioned to continue the item to the August 20, 2019 PZC
meeting, with the direction that staff provide a more thorough analysis of the uses
allowed in Park vs. Public Facility zoning, research the purchase of the property to
determine intended use, and how the Future Land Use Map planning discussion
determined this parcel to be P. Commissioner Nusbaum seconded the motion and it
carried unanimously 6-0.
VIII. Consent Agenda
A – PZC Meeting Minutes – July 16, 2019
B – PZC Decision – Code Text Amendment CTA19002
3 PZC Minutes – August 6, 2019
Action: Commissioner Barnes motioned to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner
Nusbaum seconded the motion and it carried unanimously 6-0.
IX. Adjourn – The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 pm.
Approved this 20th Day of August 2019
SIGNED: ___________________________________________
Chairperson
970.748.4004 eric@avon.org
TO: FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Honorable Chairperson Hardy & Planning Commission
Commission Eric Heil, Town Manager
Village (at Avon) PUD Guide Introduction
August 15, 2019
SUMMARY: This report provides an introduction and overview of the Village (at Avon) PUD Guide
(“Village PUD”). The Village PUD and the Development Agreement are collectively defined and referred to
as the “Development Plan” in the Village PUD. The Village PUD includes an extensive list of defined terms
which are material to the provisions throughout the Village PUD. Defined terms are capitalized and can be
found in Exhibit H to the Village PUD.
HISTORY: The Village PUD was originally approved as part of the Town’s annexation of Traer Creek in
1998 and was accompanied by a development and annexation agreement at the time of annexation.
Revisions to the Village PUD occurred as part of the 2012 settlement of litigation between the Town of
Avon, Traer Creek-RP LLC, and Traer Creek Metropolitan District. Since the adoption of the revised
Village PUD in 2012, four amendments to the Village PUD have occurred. The first was in 2013 and
clarified that residential-only development could exceed 280 Dwelling Units with a cul-de-sac exceeding
1,000 feet. The second amendment approved the right of Traer Creek to construct 100% residential in
Planning Area F which was reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council.
The third amendment, which occurred in 2018, was to approve a realignment of East Beaver Creek Blvd.
road to the south and to approve a 10% increase in density of Planning Area F, which was
administratively approved pursuant to the Village PUD. FInally, staff recently approved an administrative
Village PUD (map) amendment to coincide with the re-sized Planning Area D and Planning Area F.
VILLAGE PUD ELEMENTS: The Village PUD is arranged to address a variety of elements for land use
rights, obligations and process. The Village PUD incorporates many regulations and procedural
requirements of the Avon Development Code as existed in 2014; however, the Village PUD has vested
rights until 2039 which prohibits the Town from imposing new or different regulations to the Village PUD.
Newly enacted rules or regulations may apply with the Village PUD so long as such application does not
adversely impact development with the Village PUD.
The following selected elements of the Village PUD are addressed in this overview:
•Total Density
•Planning Areas
•Special Review Use Process
•Temporary Uses and Structures
•Subdivision
•Development Plan Amendment Procedures
•Supplemental Regulations
o Design Review Guidelines
o Affordable Housing Plan
o Provision of Certain Amenities
TOTAL DENSITY: The total permitted density for the Village PUD is 2,400 Dwelling Units (which includes
500 affordable housing units) and 825,000 Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space along with
additional density for Planning Area I which is located to the far east on the north side of the Eagle River.
Page 2 of 4
Planning Area I has the right to 196,970 Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space and at least 280
Dwelling Units with a single access and at least 750 Dwelling Units if a secondary access is constructed.
Accessory Structures are counted as an additional Dwelling Unit.
A guest bedroom within a Bed and Breakfast is counted as 1/3 of a Dwelling Unit.
Each Accommodation Unit is counted as 1/3 of a Dwelling Unit, or, in the alternative, a formula can be used
to divide the total accommodation square footage by 1,800 to yield the number of equivalent Dwelling
Units.
There are a list of exemptions from the Gross Square Footage of Commercial Space allowance which
include hallways, lobbies, stairwells, meeting and banquet facilities and parking structures.
PLANNING AREAS: The Village PUD designates “Planning Areas” which are similar to the Town’s zone
districts. Each Planning Area designates “Uses by Right”, “Special Review Uses” and “Prohibited Uses”.
Building envelopes are defined by setbacks, building heights, and maximum site coverage. Maximum
residential density is designated by Dwelling Units per acre.
Notably, Planning Area A allows for mixed-use higher density development that is very similar to Avon’s
existing Town Center zoning, including a right to build up to 80, and potentially 110 feet for Hotel uses
pursuant to the Special Review Use process.
The Planning Areas also include PA-B (4 acre park land dedicated to Town); PA-E (3 acre school site
dedicated to Town); P1-P3 Parklands which are required to be incorporated into future phases of the
development; OS1 – OS7 Open Space parcels; and PF-1 – PF-3 Public Facility parcels.
SPECIAL REVIEW USE: The Special Review Use process in the Village PUD is similar to the Avon
Development Code special review use process, with staff review and PZC decision.
TEMPORARY USES AND STRUCTURES: The criteria and procedures for Temporary Uses and
Structures references the Avon Development Code regulations for criteria and process with the additional
requirement that any temporary use or structure is required to have a prior Design Review Board approval
attached to the application.
SUBDIVISION: The subdivision regulations in the Avon Development Code apply except as modified in
the Village PUD. Planning Areas A, B, C, D, E, F (Lot 1) and J (land on north side of I-70 interchange)
establish an administrative review process for subdivisions that meet the subdivision design standards. No
public hearing is required unless requested by the subdivision applicant. The administrative subdivision
review process includes a one-step Final Plat review only.
The criteria for subdivision review are modified from the Avon Development Code as follows:
7.16.070(e)(5) and (9) DO NOT apply.
(5) The proposed subdivision shall be compatible with surrounding land uses.
Page 3 of 4
(9) The subdivision is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area and shall not
adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area;
7.16.070(f)(2) and (3) DO NOT apply.
(2) The final plat conforms to the approved preliminary plan and incorporates all recommended changes,
modifications and conditions attached to the approval of the preliminary plan;
(3) The final plat conforms to all preliminary plan criteria
7.16.070(e)(1) is modified to substitute PUD Guide for Development Code.
The proposed subdivision shall comply with all applicable use, density, development and design standards
set forth in this Development CodePUD Guide that have not been otherwise modified or waived pursuant to
this Chapter through the alternative equivalent compliance process and that would affect or influence the
layout of lots, blocks and streets. Applicants shall not create lots or patterns of lots in the subdivision that
will make compliance with such development and design standards infeasible or impossible.
7.16.070(e)(3) is modified as follows:
The subdivision application shall be consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other community
planning documents, as modified by the Development Plan.
7.16.070(e)(7) is modified as follows:
The proposed utility and road extensions are consistent with the utility's service plan and are consistent
with the Avon Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Transportation Master Plan, as modified by the
Development Plan.
7.16.070(f)(4) is modified as follows:
The development will substantially comply with all sections of the Development Code, as modified by the
Development Plan.
Material Modification to Certain Street Connections: A material aspect to the revised Village PUD in
the Settlement was to incorporate a second east-west street connection across Lot 1. “Required Street
Connections” are identified to accomplish this. Any change from the Required Street Connections may be
referred to Council at the discretion of the Planning Director. Please note that the street terminology used
for the future streets plan is that the northern east-west street is referred to as East Beaver Creek Blvd. and
the southern east-west street connection is referred to as “Main Street”.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT PROCEDURES: The Village PUD sets forth seven specific
changes to the Development Plan that may be processed administratively. All other amendments must
follow the formal process set forth in 7.16.060 PUDs in the Avon Development Code. Administrative
amendments include the following:
(i) Density Allowance: a 10% increase of density may be allowed within any Planning Area
provided the total number of Dwelling Units for PA-A, C, D, F, G, H, J, K, RMF 1 and RMF 2
Page 4 of 4
does not exceed 2,400 units.
(ii) Road Alignments: Changes to Village PUD to match road changes approved by Town.
(iii) Public Improvements: Amendments to Development Agreement that require a conforming
amendment to the Village PUD.
(iv) Subdivisions: Town approved plats that require conforming change to the Village PUD.
(v) Planning Area Boundaries and Lot Lines: Adjustments to Planning Areas that do not
exceed 10%.
(vi) Certain Text Amendments: Amendments to the Village PUD to adopt similar language to
Avon Development Code amendments when requested by Town.
(vii) Compatible and Adequately Mitigated Modifications: Modifications to Development
Standards which are compatible with adjacent uses, consistent with Development Standards,
and which adequately mitigate impacts.
SUPPLEMENTAL REGULATIONS: There are sixteen “supplemental regulations” that address a variety of
matters. This report highlights three of the supplemental regulations.
Design Review Guidelines: All projects, except homes on the north hillside, are required to be referred to
the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission for review and comment, but not for approval, ratification or
disapproval. Additionally, the Village Design Review Board must include one Avon representative.
Affordable Housing Plan: The Master Developer is required to provide a total of 500 affordable housing
units. 244 affordable housing units have already been constructed (Buffalo Ridge). The remaining 256
affordable housing units are required to be provided when 650,000 sq.ft. of Commercial Space is
constructed AND a total of 1,881 Dwelling Units have been constructed.
Provision of Certain Amenities: This section addresses parks in the Village PUD. Planning Area P3 is
the location for a “community park”. 50% of the community park must be constructed at the time of
completing the 601st Dwelling Unit. The second 50% of the community park is required to be constructed at
the time of completing the 1,200 Dwelling Unit. Planning Area P3 is thirteen acres and has potential to be a
substantial community park. The Master Developer is obligated to dedicate a pocket park to the Town at
the time of Final Plat for Planning Area C. Additionally, the Master Developer is required to dedicate an
additional 5.8 acres of land for parks and has flexibility to dedicate such park lands in Planning Areas A, C,
D, K, J, and I.
The Village PUD is attached including the Village PUD Master Plan. We can answer any questions or
discuss any other aspects of the Village PUD at the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting.
Thank you, Eric
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Staff Report – Rezoning – Continued Public Hearing
August 20, 2019 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
Project File REZ19001
Property Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Owner
Current Zoning
Town of Avon
Residential High Density
Proposed Zoning
Park
Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner
Introduction
At the previous public hearing, PZC approved a motion to continue the hearing pending a more
thorough analysis of the uses allowed in Park vs. Public Facility zoning, research the purchase
of the property to determine intended use, and how the Future Land Use Map planning
discussion determined this parcel to be P. This report seeks to address those issues.
Process
The review process first requires a noticed public hearing with PZC. Final action is taken on the
Application by Town Council after conducting public hearings and either approval by Ordinance
or denial by motion.
Considerations
Public Facilities Zoning: Below are the different uses allowed between the P and PF zone
district:
Use Category Use Type
Use-
Specific
Regulations
P PF
Residential Uses
Household Living
Dwelling, Single-
Family Detached S
Dwelling, Two-
Family/ Duplex S
Dwelling, Townhouse S
Dwelling, Multi-
Family S
Dwelling, live/ work S
Accessory DU S
Public and Institutional Uses
Community
Services
Art gallery or
museum P
Community centers P P
Library P 7.24.050(a)
Staff Review &
Report
PUBLIC HEARING:
PZC
Council & 1st
Reading of
Ordinance
PUBLIC HEARING:
Council & 2nd
Reading of
Ordinance
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Government
services, offices and
facilities
P P 7.24.050(a)
Post office branches P
Religious assembly S
Day Care
Preschool, nursery
school S 7.24.060(c)
Child care, in home S 7.24.060(c)
Educational
Facilities
College or university
(nonexempt) P 7.24.050(a)
School, K-12 (public
and private) P 7.24.050(a)
School, vocational-
technical and trade P 7.24.050(a)
Parks and Open
Space
Arboretum or
botanical garden P 7.24.050(b)
Community garden P
Community playfields
and parks P
Golf course P
Parks and forest
preserves (private,
not-for-profit
P
Transportation
Bus terminal P 7.24.060(d)
Rail terminal
(passenger) P
Commercial parking
facilities (surface &
structure)
P
Small wind energy
system S S
Wireless com-
munication tower
and/or antenna
S S
Commercial Uses
Health Care
Facilities
Medical center/
hospital P
Medical and dental
clinics and offices S
Riding academies S
Electrical supply
stores P
Nursery,
landscaping
supply
P
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Industrial Service
(cont'd) Heavy
industrial uses
S
Mining and mineral
extraction S S
Recycling facilities,
drop-off P P
There are many different types of uses that are allowed under the PF zone district. The items
are broader than the P uses, which are almost exclusively limited to items that directly support
the principle park use.
Staff proposed the P zone district because it interpreted that Town Council’s direction was to
freeze the current use and codify it through a zoning change. Staff also recognized the Future
Land Use Map as a guiding document for this application and did not want to veer from the
preestablished direction without undergoing an amendment. The current RH zoning would
allow (or would most likely require, due to it being owned by the Town) community housing and
changing the lot to the PF zone district would require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to
alter the Future Area Land Use Map.
If the goal of the Town is to one day perhaps allow for housing, the current zoning and dwelling
unit allocation seems to be the right approach. The mechanics of accomplishing the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment in conjunction with a Rezoning are not overwhelming, but it
seems redundant to achieve the same future goals as would be allowed today. Staff knows the
difficulty in turning land perceived to be reserved for parks into housing but does not anticipate a
more streamlined or intuitive process under the PF zone designation.
LOT 16 TIMELINE
1974 BMBC Final Plat – Does not contemplate any lots between Tract G (park) and West
Beaver Creek Boulevard.
1974 BMBC Plat Amendment 1 – Creates properties along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and
includes the Lot 16 property in Lot 6, designates 36 condo units to the property.
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
BMBC Plat Amendment 2 - Staff does not have a record of Amendment 2.
1976 - BMBC Plat Amendment 3 - Lot 16 shown as exists today and has 12 assigned
condo/apartment units. By now the majority of Tract G is encircled.
1978 - BMBC Plat Amendment 4 - Further outlines additional lots within the subdivision, no
change to Lot 16.
1991 - Ordinance 91-10 - Establishes zoning for the area, specifically designates Lot 16 with 14
dwelling units. Staff assumes the additional dwelling units were assigned due to previous
zoning commitments that are not properly saved in the record. This was after the Town had
designated the lot as a preferred access location to the park in 1990, but before purchase by the
Town (see next section).
TIMELINE OF SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
Staff tried to take verbatim the language from different documents over the years. Quotes,
maps, and staff synopsis are shown in order of their appearance, and quotes are in italics for
clarity, with their corresponding subareas of the document displayed before.
1990 Comprehensive Plan
TOWN CORE PLANNING INFLUENCES
Major Transportation Corridors “Key viewpoints from I-70…are identified on the Town Core
Planning Influences Map. Special attention should be given to preserve and enhance views that
are crucial to formulating a positive image of the Town.
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Undeveloped Lands “The few remaining vacant lands that border Nottingham Park are also
important to the image of the Town and the function of the park. The absence of development
on these parcels presently allows views into the park.”
Town Core Planning Influences shows a strong emphasis on views from I-70.
[Proposed] Land Use Plan identifies Lot 16 as Park. The other undeveloped lot on the park (Lot 12) is proposed to remain
Residential. A parking structure is proposed where the Recreation Center is currently located.
TOWN CORE LAND USE PLAN
Nottingham Park Area “Nottingham Park should be expanded to include the two undeveloped
lots on the north edge of the park. These parcels will ensure visual access to the park from I-70
and permit public access between residential lots.”
OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
Existing Recreation Resources “Because of the park’s importance to the passerby impression
of Avon, views into the park from I-70 should be preserved… Visibility to the park is good from I-
70 through presently undeveloped residential lots on West Beaver Creek Boulevard. These lots
should be incorporated as part of the park to ensure visual and pedestrian access from West
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Beaver Creek Boulevard. The lots also have potential to be developed into parking spaces that
would have direct access to the lake.”
Parks Nottingham Park is an attractively designed and highly used public facility. On normal
days, parking is adequate; however, during special events (such as concerts and various
community celebrations), the demand for parking exceeds the supply. Some additional parking
should be provided on the park site. Because of the park’s importance to the passerby
impression of Avon, views into the park from I-70 should be preserved.
Town Core Urban Design Plan shows Lot 16 as part of the Nottingham Park Planning Area for Subarea Plans, with a strong
emphasis on access.
TOWN SUBAREA DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS
Subarea 8: Nottingham Park Residential District Does not explicitly mention any design
considerations that would affect Lot 16.
Subarea 9: Nottingham Park and Municipal Center “Develop an overall landscape,
circulation, and signage plan for the area to integrate the various functions into a whole
municipal activity center.”
1992 Recreation Master Plan
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Image from Nottingham Park Analysis map.
NEEDS IDENTIFICATION What the Community has Requested
CONCLUSIONS “Adding land to Nottingham Park, especially if it would ease parking problems
or provide an even better facility in the long term, was supported by most participants [of focus
group meetings].”
FOCUS GROUP SURVEY RESULTS
SPECIAL EVENTS “More parking in and around Nottingham Park is needed…”
The Recommended Master Plan map shows actions for Lot 16, and suggests improved parking on the east and west sides of the
park.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND ACTION PLAN Implementing the Master Plan
Nottingham Park “The Town should move ahead with the purchase of the vacant parcel on the
north side of the park as called for in the Comprehensive Plan. Considerations should be given
to other options such as securing a portion of the property as a trail and vehicular access
easement or purchase of an area wide enough for a small parking lot and a 10’ sidewalk (50’ –
70’ in width).”
September 14, 1993 Town Council Meeting
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Meeting minutes discussing the purchase: “Mr. Bill James informed lot 16, a vacant lot, is
located on West Beaver Creek Blvd. next to Buck Creek Condominiums. The Town’s
Comprehensive Master Plan suggests the Town purchase Lot 16 as open space and as a view
corridor. The Recreation Master Plan suggests the Town purchase Lot 16 as a view corridor
and also as additional parking and alternate access to Nottingham Park. Since we have been
master planning the entire park area and looking at building an aquatic center and library on
Tract G this seems an opportune time to purchase Lot 16. “
1996 Comprehensive Plan
Staff’s copy of the report lacks all of the maps; no explicit mention of Lot 16 was found.
2006 Comprehensive Plan
Existing/Approved Land Uses map misrepresents Lot 16 as Park.
Community Framework Plans misrepresents additional properties as Park and does not include the view corridor considerations
from previous plans.
The Future Land Use Map shows the lot as Park.
2009 Nottingham Park Master Plan
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
The "Map of Previous Plan Recommendations" shows the preserved view corridor and potentially increased parking area.
The plan recommends a new entry monument and a new path from Lot 16 to the park.
STAFF RESPONSE
The 1992 Recreation Master Plan and the 1990 Comprehensive Plan are the plans most
pertinent to the purchase, construction, and subsequent Future Land Use Map designation of
Park for Lot 16. Staff does not deny the great utility in having the lot open for parking, access,
and views but does not agree that its singular dedication to auto oriented access is its highest
and best use.
Viewshed analysis shows that the park and lake are visible from a small section of I-70, but as
time goes on the view has become less pronounced as the landscaping on adjacent lots, Lot 16,
and the park have all matured. Staff assumes this trend will continue, and the largest trees
interrupting the viewshed are on Lot 16.
Google Streets View from 2008 shows a view of the park.
Google Streets View from 2018 shows the landscape maturing and providing less of a view into the park.
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
As stated in the previous staff report, Lot 16 did not create the parking demand, but its presence
induces people to park on West Beaver Creek Boulevard. The planning documents that staff
reviewed generally speak to “solving” parking issues, and staff feels that the current regime
does not accomplish this.
Alternatively, the 1992 Recreation Master Plan states, “Considerations should be given to other
options such as securing a portion of the property as a trail and vehicular access easement or
purchase of an area wide enough for a small parking lot and a 10’ sidewalk (50’ – 70’ in width).”
With the lot owned by the Town, an easement or sharing of the lot is not practical today but
reserving the ability to do so in the future is an asset the Town should not dispose of lightly.
As stated in the previous report, autonomous vehicle technology may allow (or require) a
different manner of access and parking. It may be more feasible and practical to convert a
portion of the land into housing and redesign an adequate autonomous vehicle drop-off on the
same lot. Views could even be enhanced in this outcome.
REVIEW CRITERIA.
The PZC and Town Council shall use the following review criteria as the basis for
recommendations and decisions on applications for rezonings:
(1) Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code;
(2) Consistency with the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
(3) Physical suitability of the land for the proposed development or subdivision;
(4) Compatibility with surrounding land uses;
(5) Whether the proposed rezoning is justified by changed or changing conditions in
the character of the area proposed to be rezoned;
(6) Whether there are adequate facilities available to serve development for the type
and scope suggested by the proposed zone compared to the existing zoning, while
maintaining adequate levels of service to existing development;
(7) Whether the rezoning is consistent with the stated purpose of the proposed zoning
district;
(8) That, compared to the existing zoning, the rezoning is not likely to result in adverse
impacts upon the natural environment, including air, water, noise, stormwater
management, wildlife and vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated;
(9) That, compared to the existing zoning, the rezoning is not likely to result in
significant adverse impacts upon other property in the vicinity of the subject tract;
Same view from 2016. 2004 Aerial image of Lot 16, with the lake and park above
the image.
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
(10) For rezoning within an existing PUD, consistency with the relevant PUD Master
Plan as reflected in the approval of the applicable PUD; and
(11) Adequate mitigation is required for rezoning applications which result in greater
intensity of land use or increased demands on public facilities and infrastructure.
Staff Response: Last meeting, staff made the case that parking on West Beaver Creek
Boulevard, comparable access from the other two main portals (east and west), and the current
viewshed are not ideal. Protecting these items seemed to be at the forefront of the decision-
making process in the early 1990s but have since been merely managed and not fully
cultivated. Staff is not finding fault in the actions of any council, staff member, or plan, but
brings them to the attention of PZC to illustrate that these issues require creative thinking to
ameliorate.
The housing crunch in the valley and the environmental ramifications of displacing by-right
housing away from the valley floor concern staff. In the future creative thinking will be needed
to design a solution to Lot 16 that accomplishes these seemingly disparate goals and limiting
creative outlets through a rezoning is not supported by staff. For these reasons, staff suggests
denial of the application with the findings as stated below.
Available Options
Upon conducting a public hearing, PZC has the following options:
1. Recommend approval of P zoning to Town Council.
2. Recommend denial of the rezoning to the P zone district to Town Council.
3. Continue the Application to August 20, 2019.
Staff recommends denial of the application with the findings below. Alternatively, staff has
formulated a recommendation of approval.
Recommended Motion:
“I move to recommend that the Avon Town Council deny Case #REZ19001, an application for
Rezoning of Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek, with the findings of fact as listed in the
staff report.”
Findings for Denial Recommendation:
1. The application is complete;
2. The application was reviewed in accordance with the general procedures outlined in
Code Section 7.16.050;
3. The PZC held a public hearing on August 6, 2019, after providing necessary public
notification in accordance with the Code;
4. The application provides enough information to determine that the application does not
comply with the relevant review criteria;
5. The review criteria in Code Section 7.16.050(c) were reviewed and substantial
compliance with the criteria was not found specifically with 1, 5, 8, and 11;
6. The application does not comply with the stated purposes of the Development Code,
specifically with (e), (g), and (m);
7. Proper mitigation is not provided as required by Code Section 7.16.050(d) because the
Park designation, and associated parking uses, put more demand on public services
including transportation and right-of-way than the current residential land use
designation; and
8. Preserving Lot 16 for future housing projects achieves the intent of the Development
Code and the Comprehensive Plan more so than converting it to Park.
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 20, 2019
Findings for Approval:
1. The application is complete;
2. The application provides enough information to determine that the application complies
with the relevant review criteria;
3. The application was reviewed in accordance with the general procedures outlined in
Code Section 7.16.050;
4. The PZC held a public hearing on August 6, 2019, after providing necessary public
notification in accordance with the Code;
5. The review criteria in Code Sections 7.16.050(c) and were reviewed and substantial
compliance with the criteria was found; and
6. The application complies with the stated purposes of the Development Code.
Attachment
A: Materials from August 6, 2019 PZC Public Hearing
Link
Want to Advocate for Climate Action on Earth Day? Get YIMBY for Affordable Housing!
https://communitybuilders.org/what-we-think/blog/want-to-advocate-for-climate-action-on-earth-
day-get-yimby-for-affordable-h
Attachment A
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 6, 2019
Staff Report – Rezoning
August 6, 2019 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
Project File REZ19001
Property Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Owner
Current Zoning
Town of Avon
Residential High Density
Proposed
Park
Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner
Introduction
For PZC consideration is a rezoning application for Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek
(420 West Beaver Creek Boulevard), from Residential High Density to Park. The property is
owned by the Town of Avon and attached to this staff report is an application from the Town.
This Rezoning was formally initiated by the Avon Town Council on July, 9, 2019. At that
meeting, the Council directed the Rezoning to Parks (P), Public Facilities (PF), or any district the
Planning and Zoning Commission deemed appropriate. Planning staff has elected to present
the Rezoning as Parks (P). Town Council instructed staff to initiate the application, and the
review criteria is discussed from a pro-rezoning view in the application.
Process
The review process first requires a noticed public hearing with PZC. Final action is taken on the
Application by Town Council after conducting public hearings and either approval by Ordinance
or denial by motion.
Additional Considerations
Public Facilities Zoning: Staff analyzed the different allowed uses between the P and PF
zone district and concluded that the desired look and feel of the property – a drop-off entry to
the park – is best achieved with the P designation. PF would create the opportunity for a litany
of additional uses that seem incongruent with that direction.
Parking: Although Lot 16 is not the cause of the perceived parking issues along West Beaver
Creek Boulevard its current use plays a role in it today. Had this property been developed like
the neighboring properties in the early 1990s with housing and no public park entry, the overall
look and feel of the area would be much different. Interest in visiting the park and specifically
the beach means that this area will experience parking pressure. The original design with a few
spaces originated as a solution to a 1990s problem, and staff feels that the current pressure
merits a more comprehensive solution. Various improvements along West Beaver Creek
Boulevard could reduce the perceived safety hazard.
As autonomous car technology improves, it is likely that in the future, cars will be able (or
required) to drop people off at their desired destination and retire to a nearby empty space.
Anticipating that potential and creating the appropriate infrastructure to achieve that might be a
more appropriate long-term outcome in this location. Staff is not explicitly proposing any
Staff Review &
Report
PUBLIC HEARING:
PZC
Council & 1st
Reading of
Ordinance
PUBLIC HEARING:
Council & 2nd
Reading of
Ordinance
Attachment A
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 6, 2019
physical changes to the property today, but a rezoning that precludes housing to achieve the
current entry use seems short-sighted.
Park Access: All of properties surrounding the
park are completely built-out in terms of density
(but form may change over the years) and have a
more urban feel. The western entrances are either
a large parking lot and unflattering ball courts or a
small sliver between dense housing and the back
of the elementary school. The eastern entrance is
wide but interacts with some of the densest
development in the town (Lakeside Terrace, Falcon
Point, Riverfront, Sheridan, etc.). The park’s
defining eastern edge is Lake Street, and
besides the Old Town Hall site (zoned PF),
all parking and access is from the street out.
Certainly Lot 16 is small but could potentially
be built with some units to maintain a similar
access experience.
Viewshed Impacts: Views of the mountains
and park setting are important to preserve.
They create a sense of arrival and allow
people to begin their experience of the park
before they even step into it. While the
current view is adequately promoted, the experience today could probably be elevated. Many
people’s first view upon entry to Lot 16 is a parking lot. Staff does not feel that the rezoning
explicitly protects views or that housing is incongruent with protecting views.
Housing: Housing pressure in the valley is
real and growing. According to the 2018
Town of Avon Community Housing Plan (part
of the Avon Comprehensive Plan), “To meet
the needs of local employees in the Eagle
River Valley, over 4,000 additional dwelling
units will be required by 2020. In mid-valley,
which includes Eagle-Vail, Avon, and
Edwards, 1,500 dwelling units will be
needed.” Staff cannot speak to the
surrounding communities but does not
anticipate that number to be met. A property
zoned for housing and owned by the Town is
a tremendous asset, but this application
proposes that removing approved housing density from the valley floor is the best use of the
land. Staff does not support this logic. Due to the site’s current use, perhaps the full 14 units
allotted are not an option, but an architect could design housing that is sensitive to the site
needs.
Environmental Considerations: The impacts caused by pushing housing farther away from
the up-valley job base, such as increased commute distances relating to greenhouse gasses
and sprawl impacting other undeveloped tracts of land, are concerning.
Western access experiences.
Best View from Lot 16.
Attachment A
L16 B2 BMBC Rezone - August 6, 2019
Available Options
Upon conducting a public hearing, PZC has the following options:
1. Recommend approval of P zoning to Town Council.
2. Recommend denial of the rezoning to the P zone district to Town Council.
3. Continue the Application to August 20, 2019.
Staff recommends denial of the application with the findings below. Alternatively, staff has
formulated a recommendation of approval. The mandatory rezoning review criteria are included
in the application narrative (Attachment A).
Recommended Motion:
“I move to recommend that the Avon Town Council deny Case #REZ19001, an application for
Rezoning of Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek, with the findings of fact as listed in the
staff report.”
Findings for Denial Recommendation:
1. The application is complete;
2. The application was reviewed in accordance with the general procedures outlined in
Code Section 7.16.050;
3. The PZC held a public hearing on August 6, 2019, after providing necessary public
notification in accordance with the Code;
4. The application provides enough information to determine that the application does not
comply with the relevant review criteria;
5. The review criteria in Code Section 7.16.050(c) were reviewed and substantial
compliance with the criteria was not found specifically 1, 5, 8, and 11;
6. The application does not comply with the stated purposes of the Development Code,
specifically (e), (g), and (m); and
7. Proper mitigation is not provided as required by Code Section 7.16.050(d) because Park
designation, and associated parking uses, put more demand on public services including
transportation and right-of-way than the current residential land use designation.
Findings for Approval:
1. The application is complete;
2. The application provides enough information to determine that the application complies
with the relevant review criteria;
3. The application was reviewed in accordance with the general procedures outlined in
Code Section 7.16.050;
4. The PZC held a public hearing on August 6, 2019, after providing necessary public
notification in accordance with the Code;
5. The review criteria in Code Sections 7.16.050(c) and were reviewed and substantial
compliance with the criteria was found; and
6. The application complies with the stated purposes of the Development Code.
Attachment
A: Application Narrative
Attachment A
Application Narrative 1
APPLICATION NARRATIVE
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Date: August 6, 2019
Prepared By:
Agenda Topic:
David McWilliams, AICP, Town Planner
Lot 16 Rezoning
Introduction
The Town of Avon is applying for a Rezoning of Lot 16 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek from
Residential High Density (RH) to the Parks (P) zone district. Lot 16 is 0.646 acres located on West Beaver
Creek Boulevard and abuts Nottingham Park and Residential High-Density zoned developments. The
property is currently permitted up to 14 dwelling units. This change would codify the parcel’s current
use of short-term drop-off and access to Nottingham Park in perpetuity and eliminate the possibility of
housing on the site.
History
Before Avon was incorporated, in
1974, Lot 16 was included (along
with most of the RH properties
along West Beaver Creek
Boulevard) as part of Tract G
(currently Nottingham Park) in the
final plat of the Benchmark at
Beaver Creek (BMBC) subdivision.
In 1976, an amendment created
most of the residential lots north
of the park, and the site usage was
designated for up to 12
condominiums or multi-family
dwelling units. In 1991 the plat
designation was converted into RH
zoning (with a 14 dwelling units
allotment formed by previous zoning commitments). Subsequently, the property was sold from Buck
Creek Associates to the Town of Avon for $260,001 (roughly $460,000 in 2019 dollars). In 1996, the
current drop-off lot was installed. Since then, additional visitation to the park has resulted in more use
of the property. Many of the park’s amenities draw people to the most intuitive access point, and the
town has permitted on-street parking since 2015.
Response to Mandatory Criteria
1. Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code;
Selections from the Purposes section (AMC 7.04.030) have responses below:
a: “Divide the Town into zones, restricting and requiring therein the location, erection, construction,
reconstruction, alteration and use of buildings, structures and land for trade, industry, residence and
other specified uses; regulate the intensity of the use of lot areas; regulate and determine the area of
open spaces surrounding such buildings; establish building lines and locations of buildings designed for
specified industrial, commercial, residential and other uses within such areas; establish standards to
which buildings or structures shall conform; establish standards for use of areas adjoining such
buildings or structures”.
Attachment A
Application Narrative 2
Response: Changing the use from the RH to P would regulate the intensity of the property’s use to what
is currently present. The use on and around the property are not proposed to change.
b: “Implement the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other applicable planning
documents of the Town”.
Response: The Avon Comprehensive Plan is discussed in Criteria 2. The 2009 Nottingham Park Plan
mentions protecting viewsheds from the area, enhanced parking, and entry monuments. It is unclear if
these recommendations are directly related to Lot 16 or are more general recommendations for the
north of the park near the property.
e: “Promote adequate light, air, landscaping and open space and avoid undue concentration or sprawl
of population”.
Response: Lot 16, as the park entrance, is seen as
incompatible with housing in this application.
There are extremely limited future opportunities
to convert other parcels into park space.
g: “Prevent the inefficient use of land; avoid
increased demands on public services and facilities
which exceed capacity or degrade the level of
service for existing residents; provide for phased
development of government services and facilities
which maximizes efficiency and optimizes costs to
taxpayers and users; and promote sufficient,
economical and high-quality provision of all public
services and public facilities, including but not limited to water, sewage, schools, libraries, police, parks,
recreation, open space and medical facilities”.
Response: This application argues that the rezoning is neither an achievement nor failure in efficient
use of land.
k: Maintain the natural scenic beauty of the Eagle River Valley in order to preserve areas of historical
and archaeological importance, provide for adequate open spaces, preserve scenic views, provide
recreational opportunities, sustain the tourist-based economy and preserve property values”.
Response: The natural scenic beauty of the area is preserved in this application.
m: “Achieve innovation and advancement in design of the built environment to improve efficiency,
reduce energy consumption, reduce emission of pollutants, reduce consumption of non-renewable
natural resources and attain sustainability”.
Response: This application argues that the rezoning is neither an achievement nor failure in innovative
use of space.
2. Consistency with the Avon Comprehensive Plan;
Response: The Avon Comprehensive Plan does not explicitly mention Lot 16, but the Future Land Use
map, as part of the Comprehensive Plan, shows Lot 16 as Park. The property is located within the
Nottingham Park District, which generally speaks of preserving views, supporting the 2017 Tract G
planning effort, and connectivity. The parcel is bordered on two sides by the Valley Residential District,
which mentions redevelopment of residential uses for higher density and attainable local housing and
landscaping that softens the visual impact of structures.
Figure from the 2009 Nottingham Park Plan
Attachment A
Application Narrative 3
According to the Comprehensive Plan, “Avon’s vision is to provide a high quality of life, today and in the
future, for a diverse population; and to promote their ability to live, work, visit, and recreate in the
community.”
The goals and policies section of the Comprehensive Plan states:
E.1: Achieve a diverse range of housing densities, styles, and types, including rental and for sale, to
serve all segments of the population.
Policy E.1.2: Encourage private development and partnerships that provide a diversity of housing for
local working families.
Policy E.1.3: Provide attainable housing through alternative means, including but not limited to:
payment-in-lieu, land dedication, regulatory requirements, deed restrictions, waiver of development
and building fees, and public-private partnerships that reduce the price of units.
Policy E.1.4: Integrate attainable housing within large developments and throughout Town.
Policy E.1.5: Encourage “no net loss” of attainable housing in redevelopment.
Policy E.2.4: Site attainable housing with multi-modal transportation options and facilities, including
bike and pedestrian paths.
Goal H.1: Provide an exceptional system of parks, trails, and recreational programs to serve the year-
round needs of area residents and visitors.
Policy H.1.1: Evaluate and seek parcels or easements for open space, trails, and recreation.
Policy H.1.2: Manage, protect, and plan for public open space. Analyze trail maintenance and rule
enforcement in open space.
The parcel is not directly designated for Community Housing, but the Town’s flat, well served parcel in
the center of Town should not be taken lightly as an asset for potential development. The Community
Housing Plan (part of the Comprehensive Plan) states, “The current Comprehensive Plan sets the vision
for diverse and exciting opportunities for residents, businesses, and visitors. The current housing
market, which offers very few affordable opportunities for year-round residents to put down roots in
Avon, poses a challenge to this vision.”
3. Physical suitability of the land for the proposed development or subdivision;
Response: Lot 16 has proved suitable as a park entrance and its formal adoption as P would continue to
suit the site.
4. Compatibility with surrounding land uses;
Response: Lot 16 is bordered by two existing high-density residential developments and the park.
Rezoning to P would be compatible with the park use.
5. Whether the proposed rezoning is justified by changed or changing conditions in the character of
the area proposed to be rezoned;
Response: Due to its unique amenities, the park will experience increased pressure in coming years as
the valley continues to develop. The current drop-off and entrance use of the park may experience
more pressure, and codifying an increase in the park space may be beneficial.
6. Whether there are adequate facilities available to serve development for the type and scope
suggested by the proposed zone compared to the existing zoning, while maintaining adequate
levels of service to existing development;
Attachment A
Application Narrative 4
Response: There are adequate facilities to serve the proposed use. Additional restrooms may be
required.
7. Whether the rezoning is consistent with the stated purpose of the proposed zoning district;
Response: “The purpose of the P district is to promote and encourage a suitable environment devoted
to parks, recreation improvements, trails and organized recreation uses for the enjoyment of all
members of the community. There are no dimensional requirements for this district. Active recreation
facilities and structures will be developed according to the Comprehensive Plan.” The rezoning would
codify the extension of the park into Lot 16.
8. That, compared to the existing zoning, the rezoning is not likely to result in adverse impacts upon
the natural environment, including air, water, noise, stormwater management, wildlife and
vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated;
Response: The rezoning may result in reduced localized residential-driven impacts.
9. That, compared to the existing zoning, the rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse
impacts upon other property in the vicinity of the subject tract;
Response: Rezoning may not result in adverse impacts on other property in the vicinity of Lot 16. The
pressure on West Beaver Creek Boulevard is not anticipated to change due to the application.
10. For rezoning within an existing PUD, consistency with the relevant PUD Master Plan as reflected
in the approval of the applicable PUD; and
Response: Not Applicable.
11. Adequate mitigation is required for rezoning applications which result in greater intensity of land
use or increased demands on public facilities and infrastructure.
Response: The rezoning codifies the existing use of the land which in some respects is more intense
than the currently allowed use. No mitigation is proposed at this time.
Current Zoning
Screening Work Session - August 20, 2019
MEMO
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting Date: August 20, 2019
Prepared By:
Agenda Topic:
David McWilliams, AICP, Town Planner
Screening Work Session
Introduction
Recent development applications have stretched the screening regulations on the books. Staff
has processed and approved applications
Screening of utilities in residential areas.
Holy Cross electric has recently
required utility boxes to be pulled
off of houses in order to protect
them from snow shedding and to
ease billing. Staff included utility
box placement in a checklist for
new-builds in order to proactively
require proper screening. This edit
to the original landscape plan
speaks to the slightly haphazard
nature of the change in regulations
and the subsequent “catch up” by
the builder and staff.
Screening between duplex decks
This is a recently approved retractable screen
for two decks that are connected. Staff
worked with the applicant to come to a
solution that would not take away views from
the neighbor in perpetuity.
Dumpsters
This is a photo rendering of
a recently approved
dumpster relocation at the
Junction building. Staff
approved the relocation,
and wishes that there were
screening for the dumpster
screen, but had no code
language that supports this
initiative.
Screening Work Session - August 20, 2019
Roof Mounted Utilities
This swamp cooler was installed in Wildridge
without planning approval. In working with the
applicant, it was lowered and screened similar to
the adjacent chimney.
Berms
The West Avon Preserve trailhead and parking lot at
Beaver Creek Point was built and the neighboring house
was unhappy with the loss of privacy. Subsequently the
house applied for a large berm along their property line.
The other neighbors did not take kindly to the loss of a
sense of arrival at their property. Planning staff had little
recourse with the code in the dispute, and ultimately the
berm was built.
Current Screening Language
Staff encourages PZC to read the following language when viewed from the above applications
and come with questions and comments that staff could use to approach a language change.
(a)
Purpose. Certain site features are required to be screened from public view or adjacent
properties, as indicated in this Section. All fences, walls and plant materials used to meet the
screening requirements of this Section shall meet the related standards of this Chapter.
(b)
Minimum Screening Requirements. The following shall be screened on all properties:
(1)
All outdoor refuse facilities and recycling receptacles.
(2)
All antennas shall be located so that they are screened from view from any public right-of-way
or neighboring property. Screening may be accomplished by or through the use of
landscaping materials, existing structures, sub-grade placements or other means that both
screen the antennas and appear natural to the site.
(3)
Satellite dishes shall be screened from neighboring properties. Screening must be
accomplished through the placement of the satellite dish on the building. A separately built
fence may not be used. If this standard cannot be met in a manner that achieves an operable
Screening Work Session - August 20, 2019
satellite dish on the property, then the Town will work with the property owner to select the
least visually intrusive placement where the satellite dish is operable.
(4)
Temporary installations of oil, gasoline or liquid petroleum gas tanks, if approved, shall be fully
screened from view from all public rights-of-way and all neighboring properties.
(c)
Mechanical Equipment. The standards of this Section shall apply to all of the following:
(1)
Electrical and gas-powered mechanical equipment;
(2)
Ductwork and major plumbing lines used to heat, cool or ventilate; and
(3)
Power systems for the building or site upon which the equipment is located.
(4)
Roof and/or wall-mounted antennas and vent openings shall not be considered mechanical
equipment for purposes of these screening standards. The standards of this Section are not
intended to apply to solar arrays, solar energy collection systems or small wind energy
systems, if such systems are otherwise in compliance with applicable building codes and
development standards requirements.
(d)
Screening Standards
(1)
Roof-Mounted Mechanical Equipment. Roof-mounted mechanical equipment shall be
screened by a parapet wall or similar feature that is an integral part of the building's
architectural design. The parapet wall or similar feature shall be of a height equal to or greater
than the height of the mechanical equipment being screened. Roof-mounted mechanical
equipment, except solar energy collection systems, is prohibited on single-family residential
dwellings.
(2)
Wall-Mounted Mechanical Equipment. Wall-mounted mechanical equipment, except air
conditioning equipment (e.g., window AC units), that protrudes more than six (6) inches from
the outer building wall shall be screened from view by structural features that are compatible
with the architecture of the subject building. Wall-mounted mechanical equipment that
protrudes six (6) inches or less from the outer building wall shall be designed to blend with the
color and architectural design of the subject building.
(3)
Ground-Mounted Mechanical Equipment. Ground-mounted mechanical equipment shall be
screened from view by landscaping, a fence or a decorative wall that is integrated into the
architecture of the structure. The fence or wall shall be of a height equal to or greater than the
height of the mechanical equipment being screened.
(4)
Alternate Screening. Mechanical equipment that is not screened in full compliance with the
screening standards of this Section shall be reviewed in accordance with Section 7.16.090,
Screening Work Session - August 20, 2019
Design Review. Alternate screening methods may include, but shall not be limited to,
increased setbacks, increased landscaping, grouping the equipment on specific portions of a
site, architectural features and painting.
(e)
Loading and Service Areas.
(1)
All service areas shall be placed at the rear, on the side of or inside buildings.
(2)
No service area shall be visible from a public right-of-way or from adjacent residential areas.
(3)
Service areas and access drives shall be located so they do not interfere with the normal
activities of building occupants or visitors on driveways, walkways, in parking areas or at
entries.
(4)
Screening shall be a minimum height of eight (8) feet to screen truck berths, loading docks,
areas designated for permanent parking or storage of heavy vehicles and equipment or
materials.
(5)
Screening shall be long enough to screen the maximum size trailer that can be
accommodated on site.
(f)
Outside Storage Areas. An opaque screen consisting of one (1) or a combination of the
following shall be used to screen outdoor storage areas from adjacent properties and ROWs:
(1)
Freestanding walls, wing walls or fences;
(2)
Earthen berms in conjunction with trees and other landscaping; or
(3)
Landscaping, that must be opaque and eight (8) feet in height at maturation.
(g)
Shopping Cart Storage. All shopping carts shall be stored inside the building they serve.
Shopping cart corrals shall be made of a material suitable for withstanding weathering and
rusting. Plastic corrals are prohibited.
(h)
Refuse Facility/Dumpsters
(1)
All refuse facilities, including new refuse facilities placed on an existing development, shall be
completely screened from the public right-of-way and adjacent nonindustrial zoned properties.
(2)
Screening Work Session - August 20, 2019
Screening shall be achieved by a six-foot masonry wall or wooden fence. A gate opening to
the facility shall be situated so that the container is not visible from adjacent properties or
public ROW. Chain-link gates are not permitted. Gates must have tie-backs to secure in the
open position.
(i)
Screening Materials and Design.
(1)
Unless otherwise provided in this Section, screening may be accomplished by fencing, plant
materials or both fencing and plant materials. Screening with plant materials shall achieve
opacity by maturity. Masonry walls may be allowed for screening only if they are designed as
an integral component of the building architecture. In all cases, plant materials must be used
to screen utility boxes.
(2)
No front, side or rear fence, wall or hedge may be more than six (6) feet in height, unless
required in other subsections of Section 7.28.060.
Screening Regulations in Landscaping Code
d)
Landscape Buffer. The following regulations apply to properties where a nonresidential district
or use abuts a residential district or use:
(1)
A minimum fifteen-foot-wide buffer space shall be provided.
(2)
The buffer shall be designed with adequate landscaping or screening to properly separate the
differing uses.
(3)
New trees and shrubs shall be evenly spaced at planting.
(4)
A solid masonry wall, minimum six (6) feet in height, may be substituted for required shrubs.
(5)
Where a natural buffer exists, as determined by the Director, it shall remain undisturbed.
(6)
If used in addition to a landscape screen, fences shall have additional evergreen shrubs
planted on the residential side of the fence.
(f)
Parking Lot Landscaping. The following landscaping requirements shall be met for all off-
street surface parking lots.
(1)
Parking Lot Perimeter Landscaping:
Screening Work Session - August 20, 2019
(i)
Perimeter parking lot landscaping a minimum width of six (6) feet shall be required for all
parking lots having more than ten (10) spaces.
(ii)
A minimum of eighty percent (80%) of the length of the planting strip shall be used to screen
the parking area from the street. The screen shall be a minimum of thirty (30) inches in height
and may consist of a berm, wall, plant material, or combination thereof.
(iii)
Where lots are being developed in a mixed-use district, the parking lot perimeter landscaping
requirement may be reduced along an interior lot line, at the discretion of the Director,
provided that interior parking lot landscaping applies to both parking lots.
Screening Regulations in Special Review Use Section
Outdoor Storage. Outdoor storage is a permitted accessory use in the IC zone district with
approval of an SRU pursuant to Section 7.16.100, Special Review Use. In the NC, MC and TC
zone districts, outdoor storage is permitted through the site plan review process and subject to
compliance with the following requirements:
(i)
Except for outdoor storage associated with industrial or agricultural uses, each outdoor storage
area shall be incorporated into the overall design of the primary structure on the site and shall
be located at the rear of the primary structure.
(ii)
Each outdoor storage area shall be screened from view from all property lines and adjacent
rights-of-way by an opaque fence or wall between six (6) and eight (8) feet in height. The fence
shall incorporate at least one (1) of the predominant materials and one (1) of the predominant
colors used in the primary structure. The fence may exceed eight (8) feet in height where the
difference in grade between the right-of-way and the outdoor storage area makes a taller fence
necessary to effectively screen the area. Materials may not be stored higher than the height of
the primary structure. The perimeter of the fence or wall must be landscaped.
AEC Regulations
Lastly, PZC should know that screening is one of the AEC-able sections of code.
Going Forward
Staff encourages a robust conversation and is soliciting suggestions for considerations.