Loading...
Village at Avon PUD annexationTown of Avon Annexation & PUD Staff Report August 18, 1998 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date August 16, 1998  Project type Mixed use PUD; annexation  Legal description Attached  Zoning Rural Resource: Eagle County  Address N/A  Introduction The Village at Avon is a mixed-use Planned Unit Development (PUD) proposed for the 1,790 acre Nottingham Ranch property (including the 170 acre Stolport site) located east and north of the current Town limits. The entire parcel is currently within unincorporated Eagle County; the applicant is requesting annexation and PUD zoning by the Town. Project summary Overall, the proposal includes 750,000 square feet of commercial uses, 200,000 square feet of public and semi-public uses (such as ice rinks and entertainment facilities), and 2,400 dwelling units, 500 of which are proposed as employee housing. The residential units include a broad range of housing types, including multifamily condominiums and apartments, through large-lot, single family homes. No mobile homes are proposed within the project. The highest density commercial and residential development is proposed on the Stolport site. The areas directly north of I-70 include multifamily residential and a regional park. Farther north and east are additional residential uses, with increasingly larger homes and lots. Proposed vehicle access is through a combination of existing and anticipated routes: East Beaver Creek Boulevard, which is to be widened; An improved access from Highway 6 to replace the one now serving the concrete batch plant; A new full-diamond interchange on I-70, to be constructed at the current ranch road underpass; and Chapel Place, under construction as part of the Chapel Square project. Pedestrian access within the project centers around a linear park running east to west through the Stolport site, with connections within the project and to the existing commercial core through the Chapel Square project. Funding for project infrastructure is proposed through bonds issued by special districts, and in part repaid through tax revenues generated directly by the project. The attached draft PUD Guide includes an initial set of design guidelines, based in part on the Town’s Design Guidelines. The review and approval of individual project designs are to be the responsibility of a separate Design Review Board or Committee appointed by the developer. If approved, the project will be governed by the Avon Municipal Code with respect to law enforcement, animal control, building and related codes, zoning enforcement, public streets, liquor licensing, and licensing of businesses. Development Review Process Summary The development review process for this project includes a number of separate yet related elements: Annexation. PUD Zoning. Subdivision Special District formation Annexation Agreement This report focuses on PUD Zoning, including Development Plan and PUD Guide approval, which is the document which essentially defines and governs the project. The other elements of the process are handled primarily by the Town Council. Approval of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zone district is governed by Section 17.20.110 of the Avon Municipal Code. Following are the primary criteria used in evaluating a PUD. Please note that the following comments apply mainly to earlier drafts of the PUD Guide. Attached to this report is a revised PUD Guide that we received late Friday afternoon, that in part reflects staff’s meeting with the applicant on Friday morning 17.20.110. H. Design Criteria Conformity with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives. The primary purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide the framework for moving the Town of Avon into the future, in a manner which takes advantage of the Town’s resources and opportunities, and results in a high quality of life for both residents and visitors to the area. Goals and Policies are the foundation of the Comprehensive Plan. They are essential to both its preparation and its implementation. They set the vision for the actions to be taken by the Town in implementing the plan, and provide a direction from which all future planning decisions are made. Staff comments are addressed to the Goals and Policies that apply to this project. Goals and Policies are listed below in the same order as they appear in the Comprehensive Plan. Since this project does not involve significant redevelopment, for example, and is located in a specific area east and north of Avon, those Goals and Policies that refer exclusively to redevelopment, or to other locations such as the Town Center, are not included. Land Use A fundamental reason for having a comprehensive plan is to clearly communicate generally where and how land uses may occur in the Town. The Land Use Plan is based on these goals and policies. Implementation is through annexation, subdivision and zoning regulations. Goal A1 Ensure a balanced system of land uses that maintains and enhances Avon's identity as a residential community, and as a regional commercial, tourism and entertainment center. Comment The project includes a diverse mix of housing types and commercial uses. Offering more variety of business and entertainment activities should enhance the Town as a destination for tourists and valley residents. The increase in the number of residential units close to the Town Core, depending on pricing, should provide more of a year round population in Avon, which in turn should help support the commercial and entertainment uses. Policy A1.1 Development and redevelopment will be of a scale and intensity appropriate for the neighborhood in which it is located. Comment The property is essentially undeveloped. The project will create new neighborhoods, developed in accordance the approved Development Plan and Design Guidelines, which reflect this policy. Policy A1.3 Flexible zoning such as Planned Unit Developments (P.U.D.) should be encouraged where it results in more effective use of the land. However, such flexible zoning will only be allowed where it provides a benefit to the community and is compatible with surrounding development. Variations from standard zoning must be clearly demonstrated, and will be permitted only as needed to achieve effective development. Policy A1.4 Service and light industrial uses, including warehousing and light manufacturing, should be directed to terrain that supports effective vehicular access and circulation, and allows effective screening from adjacent uses and public ways. Comment The proposed location of this broad use category is at the East end of the project, which will be served by a new full-diamond interchange, and will have improved access to Route 6. The existing terrain effectively screens much of this area from the interstate. Also needed are provisions in the Design Guidelines and the PUD Guide to establish buffer zones between these and adjacent uses, as well as standards for landscaping, screening, outside materials storage, trash enclosures, and architectural design. Policy A1.5 The community will include a wide range of residential uses including large-lot single family and duplex, small-lot single family and duplex, multifamily, and vertically integrated residential (housing on the upper floors of commercial buildings). Comment The development plan and PUD Guide generally fulfill this policy. The PUD Guide should define an appropriate mix of residential units, including vertical integration of apartments and condominiums above commercial uses in the Stolport site. Minimum lot sizes, floor area ratios (FAR), and other quantitative measures should be included in the PUD guide. Policy A1.6 Land for open space should be preserved throughout the community, particularly on steep slopes and other environmentally sensitive areas. Comment The development includes a large amount of open space, albeit largely within private lots. In the residential area north of I-70 and east of Avon, low density and part-time occupancy combine to increase the effective amount of open space. Although much of the open space is private land, visual benefits of preserving these areas are enjoyed by residents and visitors in the valley. Using building envelopes on larger lots, as opposed to more dense development that results in site clearing, helps maintain the integrity of the existing flora and fauna. Staff is reviewing the environmental reports and overlays, and will have additional comments, particularly with regard to houses, roads and other structures placed on or crossing through sensitive areas. Policy A1.7 The community should include sufficient land for public uses such as schools, community facilities, and government services. Comment Following the Annexation Agreement, approximately 4 acres will be made available for a public works facility, and more than 7 acres will be available for a school site. The location of the public works site is not yet determined. IT is not clear where emergency service facilities will be located. Policy A1.8 Home occupations that reduce commuting by residents and do not negatively impact other residents should be encouraged. Comment Council recently amended the Avon Municipal Code (Section 17.08) to be more flexible regarding home offices and home occupations, in conformance with this policy. As proposed, the Village at Avon would be governed by this provision. Goal A2 Ensure that annexed land and adjacent uses are compatible with the community. Comment The PUD Guide should include clear standards for those areas adjacent to existing development. For example, because of the existing residences along Eaglebend Drive and commercial development including Chapel Square and City Market, the portion of Planning Area A south of Beaver Creek Boulevard, plus all of Planning Areas C, F and I, will require standards for transitional building heights, setbacks, building orientation, allowing certain uses only by special review, and screening. Policy A2.1 Parcels of land to be annexed will be master planned, in conformance with the Land Use Plan and Design Standards, and clearly show physical, visual and functional connections with the existing Town. Comment The Village at Avon is proposed as a master planned development, which generally follows the Town’s adopted Land Use Plan. The application shows physical connections via roads, and to a lesser extent, via trails. The proposed road standards should be broadened to include sidewalks and trails. While the project includes a central trail spine, the plan is not clear regarding the connections with existing development. The PUD Guide also makes reference to transit centers being allowed adjacent to the existing railroad; The PUD Guide should o better define setbacks, transitional building height, and roadway and pedestrian access standards as they relate to the rail corridor. Policy A2.2 With respect to the development of major arterial and collector roadways, and other fixed transportation facilities, this Comprehensive Plan applies to the area within a 3-mile radius of the corporate limits, except for those areas within another municipality. Comment Even though the project is undergoing review by the Town for annexation and zoning, the application to Eagle County (as “Vail Valley Centre”) has not yet been withdrawn. This policy therefore remains technically in effect, but would not be applied unless the applicant withdraws from the Town’s process to pursue County approval. Policy A2.3 The Town will maintain open communication with Eagle County and other jurisdictions and participate in discussions and planning of lands outside of the corporate limits that may affect the Town. Comment The Town provided a copy of the project application to Eagle County, and welcomes any comments by the County. The Town and the County maintain ongoing contact between their respective staffs. Policy A2.4 The Town will coordinate, to the extent practicable, its land use policies and regulations with other local jurisdictions. Comment During the course of adopting the 1996 Comprehensive Plan, Avon solicited comments from other jurisdictions, including Eagle County. The Town is part of a County-wide effort to adopt the 1997 Uniform Building Code (and related codes), to improve consistency between jurisdictions. The Town also participates in ongoing discussions that are in part intended to better coordinate policies and regulations, such as through the Eagle Valley Homebuilders Association, regular meetings of the valley’s municipal and county planning staffs, Mayors and Town Managers, and Town Councils. Goal A3 Maintain a compact urban form that respects and preserves the natural beauty of the valley, river and surrounding mountains, and maintains distinct physical and visual separations between Avon and surrounding communities. Policy A3.1 Development should first be directed to areas within and adjacent to established neighborhoods and developed areas. Comment The project generally conforms to this policy. Urban development is concentrated on the Stolport site, adjacent to existing commercial and residential development. Planning Area RMF-1 is adjacent to the proposed regional park, and appropriately located with good road access; Planning Area 2 is adjacent to but screened from the Swift Gulch maintenance facility, and directly across the interstate from the denser portions of the Stolport site. Particularly with the extension of Swift Gulch Road to the new interchange, good road access is available. Policy A3.2 To maintain the visual identity of Avon, the lands surrounding the highly developable portions of the town located along the valley floor should be designated and maintained as open space where practical, or restricted to very low density development. Comment The proposed large-lot single family residential areas north of I-70 and east of Avon conform to this policy. Steep hillsides are, with some exceptions, relatively undeveloped. The applicant’s maps are helpful in evaluating slopes and potential visual impacts; however, the Planning & Zoning Commission requested a 3-dimensional terrain map, or equivalent, to assist in evaluating the visual impacts of the project. The applicant has responded by suggesting site visits as an effective alternative to constructing a physical or computer model. Policy A3.3 Commercial, public and other uses that generate employment and customer traffic should be located to minimize the need for automobile travel. Comment The lower part of the Village is compact, adjacent to existing commercial development and accessible to transit service. Depending largely upon the ability of pedestrians to circulate within and between the project and Avon’s existing commercial and high-density residential development, the project’s location and design should encourage customers arriving by vehicle to park and then walk to shop at multiple destinations. Residential development in the Village Center and in the adjacent Village Residential area should significantly increase the customer base, but at a proportionately smaller increase in the number of vehicle trips. In addition, commercial uses within the Village Residential areas are restricted to properties fronting on Beaver Creek Boulevard, providing convenience shopping within walking distance. Sidewalks should be included with all streets within the project and the adjacent Avon commercial core. Policy A3.6 Encourage mixed-use development throughout the community, where compatible with existing neighborhoods, to more efficiently use land. Comment The project conforms to this policy, particularly in the Stolport site. Policy A3.7 Steep slopes in and around the community should be designated and preserved as open space wherever possible. Comment Although the two-dimensional maps provided by the applicant are helpful in assessing conformance with this policy, the topographic model or equivalent requested by Planning & Zoning Commission would be a more effective tool. Policy A3.8 The Eagle River should be maintained as a riparian corridor. New development and redevelopment should be compatible with the riparian environment. Comment According to the Development Plan, all portions of the property directly adjacent to the Eagle River are designated as open space. Community And Economic Development As the community moves into the future, striking a balance between a healthy, diverse economy and a livable residential community becomes both increasingly challenging and increasingly important. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve that balance. Goal B1 Enhance the Town's role as a principal, year-round residential community and regional commercial center. Comment Potential migration of sales tax revenues from Avon was a serious concern when the project was proposed to remain in unincorporated Eagle County, and was therefore in direct conflict with this Goal. As a part of the Town, however, the project will enhance Avon’s role as a regional commercial center by offering significantly more activities within Avon for visitors and residents, while giving the Town more ability to help sustain its business community by reinvesting sales tax revenues and gaining economies of scale in providing services. Achieving a year round residential community depends in part upon the price and types of housing provided, and the suitability of neighborhoods for full-time occupancy. Toward this end, the PUD Guide should include regulations on short-term rentals and lock off units. Policy B1.1 Residential neighborhoods should be maintained to a high standard of quality through effective maintenance of streets, utilities, parks and other public facilities, and through consistent application of design standards. Comment The Development Plan and application depict an overall high standard of quality of design, as well as maintenance. The application states that the design guidelines will be applied to the development review process through a Design Review Board appointed by the developer. The PUD Guide should indicate that the Town could enforce consistent application of the Guidelines, if the Town finds that the DRB is not doing so. Policy B1.2 Commercial areas will be supported through creation and maintenance of effective vehicle access and parking, transit services, all-season pedestrian and non-motorized vehicle access, and consistent application of design standards. Comment An underlying theme of the project is that its design and density facilitate access by pedestrians and vehicles. The Eagle County Regional Transportation Authority (ECRTA) and the Town will provide mass transit services. Staff recommends that the Design Guidelines include standards for transit shelters, walkways, and other facilities. Commitments for installing those facilities should be initially addressed through the either the PUD Guide or Development Agreement, and in cooperation with the ECRTA. Policy B1.3 Public and private new development and redevelopment, including buildings and public ways, will be designed and maintained to effectively accommodate persons who are temporarily or permanently impaired in sight, hearing, or mobility, dependent on wheelchairs, crutches, or other forms of mechanical assistance. Comment The applicant has stated that the project will conform to applicable standards. Goal B3 Maintain a balanced, diverse economic base that provides employment opportunities for residents and a sustainable tax base for the Town. Comment Development of the Village will substantially expand the economic base of the town and provide many employment opportunities. Policy B3.1 Promote development of facilities and activities that strengthen the Town's year-round tourism base, and relationship to the resort community. Comment This project has potential to significantly strengthen Avon’s year round tourism base through providing a greater number and variety of stores, professional services, restaurants, entertainment, lodging and community facilities. These elements combined with improved vehicular access, expanded pedestrian access and transit services will make Avon as a more attractive base for visitors. Policy B3.3 Encourage development of additional service commercial uses. Comment The PUD guide provides for these uses in Planning Areas A, H, I, J, K, and L. Goal B4 Create a strong sense of community based on awareness and participation by residents and businesses in achieving Avon’s vision for the future. Policy B4.1 Promote a community structure based on vital commercial and employment areas, cohesive and safe neighborhoods, and social consciousness. Encourage and support neighborhood events and organizations. Comment Incorporation of the Village into the Town enhances Avon as a commercial and employment center. The compact form of the development, particularly in the Stolport site and to some extent in Planning Areas RMF-1 and RMF-2, at least provides the physical closeness and relatively easy access that tend to support a sense of neighborhood. The project also includes a number of proposed community facilities, not the least of which is a regional park that can accommodate ongoing activities such as softball and soccer, as well as special events. Housing As the community grows, demand for housing of all types is increasing. While there is an ample supply of housing for second homeowners and upper income residents, there is a shortage of housing for lower and middle-income seasonal and year-round residents and their families. The following goals and policies are intended to help meet the variety of housing needs. Goal C1 Provide for diverse, quality housing to serve all economic segments and age groups of the population. Comment Approximately 25% percent of the housing within the project will be deed-restricted, locals housing. Although the proposed mix of income levels is not yet determined, the applicant has stated that the residential development in RMF-2 will be dedicated to “affordable housing” encompassing a variety of income levels. Policy C1.3 Encourage designs that contribute to the quality and diversity of the housing stock. Comment The project has a strong potential for diverse, quality housing. The zoning standards and design guidelines should further address how this will be achieved. Goal C2 Provide for affordable housing for permanent and seasonal residents that is attractive, safe and integrated with the community. Policy C2.1 New development, annexations, and major redevelopment shall include or otherwise provide for affordable housing. Comment Five hundred of the 2,400 dwelling units or approximately 21% of the housing within the project will be deed-restricted, locals housing. Policy C2.2 Wherever possible, affordable housing will be integrated with, rather than be separate from, the rest of the community. Comment The bulk of the proposed 500 affordable housing units are to be located in RMF-2, which is north of I-70. The remainder will be distributed throughout the remainder of the project, presumably in the Stolport site. The applicant has stated that the residential development in RMF-2 will be dedicated to “affordable housing” encompassing a variety of income levels, which will have the effect of creating a more diverse neighborhood. Policy C2.3 Affordable housing that is assisted by or required by the Town, will include provisions for maintaining affordability. Examples include rent and resale price limits, as currently exist in the Wildwood Townhomes development. Comment Consistent with this Policy, the developers have committed to providing 500 deed-restricted units. Staff recommends that a commitment be made to a mix of unit types and sizes. One means of creating additional affordable units would be to allow accessory units and caretaker apartments that are deed restricted and exempt from density calculations. Policy C2.4 The Town will encourage and, to the extent practical, participate in development of affordable housing. Comment While the Town believes that funding employee and other affordable housing are primarily the responsibility of the private sector, the Town has adopted a waiver of its 2% real estate transfer tax (RETT) on the first $160,000 of the purchase price of a primary residence for first time (within Avon) homebuyers. In the past, the Town Council has also considered incentives in support of deed-restricted housing, such as the reduction or waiver of certain permit fees. Application of similar incentives to the Village at Avon has not been resolved. Community Facilities And Services Part of the community’s “livability” is provided by the facilities and services available to residents and visitors. As the community grows, so does the demand for these facilities and services. These goals and policies are intended to help provide and maintain current and future facilities and levels of service. Goal D1 Ensure cost effective development of public facilities and services such as parks, community centers, youth activities, a community college campus, and public safety services such as police, fire and emergency medical that support the health, safety and welfare of existing neighborhoods and new development. Comment As included in the annexation agreement, the development will contribute toward costs of providing police, fire and emergency medical. The project also includes a public works site; a 29-acre regional park, a linear park corridor through the site; one or more ice skating facilities, and various performance spaces. The PUD Guide allows college campuses and universities. Policy D1.1 New development should only occur where it can be adequately served by public facilities and services. Comment Locating the dense development on the Stolport site takes advantage of existing infrastructure and availability of municipal services. Although most if not all of the existing infrastructure will have to expand at some point in the development of the project, it is significantly more economical, both for the applicant and for the community, to build upon existing municipal services than to create a new service infrastructure. Policy D1.2 The Town will coordinate with special purpose districts regarding service expansions and other development that could affect the achievement of its goals and objectives. Comment The service plans for public facilities have been submitted and reviewed through a separate process. The developers will be able to provide the necessary services. Policy D1.3 Wherever possible, schools, parks, and other civic facilities should be located along trails and other pedestrian and bicycle connections. Comment The linear park serves as an east-west trail corridor through the project, and appears to effectively link all of the above facilities. Staff needs more information regarding the trail network within, the project and how it connects with existing residential and commercial areas. Policy D1.4 Annexations and new subdivisions will include or otherwise provide for community services and facilities based on the increased demand created by those developments. Comment The Eagle County School District’s land dedication requirement for this project is 8.7 acres. The applicant proposes providing a 7.3-acre school site and cash payment in lieu of the remaining 1.4 acres. The applicant has agreed to a 4-acre municipal services site, but has not specified a location. The project includes a 29-acre community park, plus 17.7 acres of parkland within the linear park corridor. Policy D1.5 Encourage development of neighborhood and community based day care facilities. Comment Day care centers are a use by right in village residential, Staff recommends adding the following: Accessory day care to Planning Areas B and C, the Cultural/Recreational and Ice Skating/Events Center. Accessory day care to Planning Area G, the proposed School site, to accommodate a "Kampus Club" type daycare facility during the summer. Day care as use by right in RMF-1. Policy D1.6 Encourage development of youth-oriented educational and recreational activities and facilities, and include youth in the programming of any community or public facilities. Comment The inclusion of ice skating, the community park and linear park corridor, and the cultural and recreational facilities would seem to support this policy. Transportation, Parking, And Circulation The town’s transportation system serves residents, visitors, commuting employees, shoppers, and businesses. Avon’s unique combination of terrain, climate, seasonal visitor demands, small resident population, and limited road capacity, requires an integrated, innovative transportation system. While automobiles will likely remain the mode of choice for travel to and from town, the transportation system should reduce the need for automobile travel within the town by providing safe and attractive pedestrian walkways, bicycle paths, public transit, and underground parking structures. Goal E1 Create an integrated transportation system that minimizes dependence on automobile travel within the Town by making it easier to use transit, walk, or use bicycles and other non- motorized vehicles. Policy E1.1 Streets should, to the extent possible, effectively accommodate transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and other modes of transportation. Comment The Road Standards are the appropriate basis for defining designs to accommodate these other modes. Policy E1.2 Commercial, public and other uses that generate employment and customer traffic should be located on transit routes, and linked by pedestrian and bicycle paths to minimize the need for automobile travel. Comment The project concept addresses this Policy more effectively than most by providing a linear corridor that threads through the project. The applicant should present a more fully developed plan for this crucial project element. Policy E1.3 The Town will endeavor to maintain a peak hour level of service (LOS) of level C or better for all major roadways. Comment With regard to the timing of improvements to Beaver Creek Boulevard; construction of the full- and half- diamond interchanges on I-70; and construction of the improved access to Route 6 at the east end of the project, Staff recommends following the 1996 Transportation Plan Update. The development plan depicts roundabouts for major intersections within the project. The Town and the developer have agreed on most of the contributions toward necessary roadway improvements to maintain level of service C. The timing of the full-diamond interchange remains unresolved. Policy E1.4 Commercial areas should be designed to minimize in-town vehicle travel by making it easier for people arriving by car to park and conveniently walk to multiple stores and businesses. Comment This is essentially a repeat of the comment in reference to Policy A3.3. The portion of the Village on the Stolport site is compact, adjacent to existing commercial development and accessible to transit service. Depending largely upon the ability of pedestrians to circulate within and between the project and Avon’s existing commercial and high-density residential development, the project’s location and design should encourage customers arriving by vehicle to park and then walk to shop at multiple destinations. Residential development in the Village Center and in the adjacent Village Residential area should significantly increase the customer base, but at a proportionately smaller increase in the number of vehicle trips. In addition, commercial uses within the Village Residential areas are restricted to properties fronting on Beaver Creek Boulevard, providing convenience shopping within walking distance. Sidewalks should be included with all streets within the project and the adjacent Avon commercial core. Policy E1.5 Intersections should be designed for maximum vehicle capacity but not at the expense of safety, pedestrian access, bicycle access, and/or aesthetic design. Comment The project’s major intersections are proposed as roundabouts. Policy E1.6 All new development and redevelopment should include or otherwise provide for effective transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Comment The proposed trail system is ostensibly a significant step towards an integrated transportation system, provided that trail width accommodates a variety of modes. The transit system will be provided jointly by the Town and the Eagle County Regional Transit Authority. The PUD Guide and Design Guidelines should include provisions for bus stops, shelters, bicycle racks or lockers, and other facilities integrated with sidewalks and the trail system. Also included should be a commitment by the applicant to implement effective transportation demand management programs (TDM) to reduce employee vehicle trips and parking demand. A few examples of such program elements include ride sharing, providing employee bus passes, charging for employee parking, installation of bicycle racks or covered, secure parking areas, and providing access to lockers and showers. Policy E1.7 When planning, designing, or significantly modifying its transportation facilities, systems or regulations, the Town will involve and consult with representative users of transit, bicycle paths, and pedestrian facilities. Comment The Town has referred the application to the ECRTA, which is helping to coordinate the countywide regional trail system. Goal E2 Provide an adequate supply of automobile parking, both public and private, to serve the needs of the community. Comment The applicant has stated that sufficient on site parking is essential to the project’s long-term success, but points to current literature (much of it presented by or through the Urban Land Institute, or ULI) that supports significantly reducing the number of parking spaces required by Town standards in the more densely developed portions of the project. The revised PUD Guide included in your meeting packet contains the applicant’s proposed standards. As of this writing, staff has not yet reviewed the proposed standards. Goal E3 Promote the development of an enhanced transit system for the Town. Policy E3.1 Encourage and participate, to the extent practical, in cost-effective transit partnerships with local resorts and governmental interests, including gondola connections, shuttle buses, and other options. Comment The scale and density of commercial and residential development, particularly in the valley floor, combined with the public and private entities with an interest in more effective transportation, make enhancing the transit system potentially very economical. The PUD Guide refers to transportation facilities, particularly along the rail corridor. The project would seem to increase the potential for creating transit and trail links with the Confluence site and the funicular, the airport, and perhaps Vail. Policy E3.2 Maintain the existing regional and Town-wide bus system, and enhance as necessary to provide services to the community as it grows. Comment As previously stated, transit service within the project will be provided by the Town and the ECRTA. Goal E4 Improve the physical connection between the Town and the Denver & Rio Grande Railroad. Policy E4.1 Ensure preservation of the railroad right-of-way, in its entirety, through and adjacent to Avon, if it is abandoned. Comment The Town remains committed to ensuring the integrity of the rail corridor within the Town boundaries, at a minimum. The PUD Guide’s inclusion of transportation centers and related facilities would seem to support preservation of this valuable corridor. Policy E4.2 The Town will endeavor to provide for safe and cost- effective pedestrian crossings through the railroad right-of-way wherever feasible, particularly between residential neighborhoods and employment centers, shopping centers, and schools. Comment This particular element is not addressed in the PUD Guide The future of the railroad right-of-way is uncertain. To the extent possible, the Town and the developer should cooperate in obtaining any necessary authorization for pedestrian crossings. Policy E4.3 The Town will endeavor to provide for safe and cost-effective at-grade vehicular crossings through the railroad right-of-way wherever feasible. Comment The development plan refers to an improved vehicular railroad crossing and bridge over the Eagle River, near the East end of the project. The time frame for its construction is a current topic of discussion between the applicant and the developer, in part due to the uncertain future of the railroad right-of-way. However, a separated-grade vehicle crossing may well be the best solution regardless of the railroad’s actions, given that automobile traffic will conflict with virtually any transportation mode(s) that uses the railroad right-of-way. Environment Avon is a very desirable place to live and work largely because of its exceptional natural environment. In a very real sense, the economic and social health of Avon depends upon the protection and enhancement of these resources. Goal F1 Make Avon's unique natural setting and its open space system central elements to its identity and structure. Policy F1.1 Future development and redevelopment shall minimize degradation of the environment, particularly in sensitive natural areas. Comment As mentioned previously, the Planning & Zoning Commission requested a terrain model or equivalent, to better assess the visual impacts discussed in these goals and policies. Policy F1.2 Development shall not be allowed on steep hillside areas vulnerable to environmental and visual degradation. Comment It appears that the project minimizes development on steep slopes, with the exception of roads and some of the homesites north of I-70. Policy F1.3 The river corridor will be protected as an important riparian habitat. Comment The portion of the property directly adjacent to the Eagle River is designated as Open Space. Although the uses allowed are fairly limited, staff recommends further limiting the uses in and access to Planning Areas OS-9 and OS-10, in order to protect the riparian habitat. Policy F1.4 Development and redevelopment will accommodate wildlife habitat, including deer and elk migration routes, or otherwise mitigate loss of habitat. Comment The development meets the recommendations of the wildlife biologist retained by the applicants. The mitigation plan was referred to the Division of Wildlife Friday evening for their review and comment. Policy F1.5 Major development proposals will be referred to the Colorado Division of Wildlife for review and comment regarding wildlife issues. Comment The application was referred to CDOW. The response is included with this report. Policy F1.6 Air quality should be protected through reducing the number of pollution sources to the extent possible, such as limiting new fireplace installations and reducing demand for automobile trips, and reducing pollution from existing sources through alternative fuels, scrubbers, and other technologies. Comment The applicants have agreed to follow the Town’s wood burning policy in the PUD Guide Policy F1.7 The Town will encourage and actively participate in waste reduction and recycling. Comment No specific provisions for recycling are included in the application. Staff recommends that the applicant provide an overall strategy for encouraging recycling within the project. Policy F1.8 New and redeveloped buildings and sites should be designed to minimize transmission of noise to adjacent areas. Comment To address this concern, particularly where the project is adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods, staff has recommended that the PUD Guide be amended to change some of the proposed “use by right” to “special review use.” The applicant has agreed, and the draft PUD Guide included with this packet should reflect most if not all of staff’s recommended changes. Parks, Recreation And Open Space Parks, trails and open space enhance the community’s quality of life. Open space preserves wildlife habitat and view corridors; trails offer walking, jogging, and bicycling opportunities; neighborhood and community parks serve as places to gather and recreate. Goal G1 Provide an exceptional system of parks, trails, and recreational programs to serve the year-round leisure-time needs of area residents and visitors. Policy G1.1 New residential and resort developments will incorporate recreational amenities. Comment The project includes a 29-acre park and 17.7 acre linear park and trail corridor running east west through the Stolport site. Also to be included is an ice skating rink, a community center and various unnamed recreational facilities. Policy G1.2 The Town will continue to evaluate and acquire parcels or easements for open space, trails and recreation. Comment The project includes nearly 500 acres of natural open space, most of which will remain in private ownership. The development plan provides for one access point, near Planning Area RMF-2, to National Forest Lands north of the property. The applicant makes the point that trails established through the proposed Residential/Single Family areas have been on private land all along and were therefore never legally open to the public. These trails are to remain closed to the public. Staff suggests that the applicant work with interested trail users to explore potential connections between the Davos Trail and the National Forest Land north of the project, that avoid the private land within the project. Policy G1.3 The Town's recreational trail system will integrate with the regional trail system. Comment The means by which the trails within the project connect with the Town’s and the Regional trail system should be clarified. Policy G1.4 New annexations and development will include or otherwise contribute to land for trails, open space and recreation purposes. Comment The project conforms to this policy, in that it incorporates: A looped trail system in the lower portion of the development. Pocket parks plus a 29-acre community park. Approximately 500 acres of private open space. The timing of construction of these amenities should be specified, possibly in the Annexation Agreement. Community Image And Design Community image is a combination of natural setting, architectural design, density, design of streets and walkways, signage, public art, community facilities, and the care and maintenance of neighborhoods and businesses. An attractive community image not only fosters a sense of identity and pride in its residents and businesses; it is critical to its long-term success as a tourism destination. Goal H1 Establish and maintain a high quality visual image of the Town. Policy H1.1 The Town's streets and walkways shall be designed and maintained as safe, attractive public spaces. Comment The project concept emphasizes the importance of safe, attractive public spaces. The Design Guidelines will presumably address this in a more tangible way. Policy H1.2 Commercial areas should convey a sense of identity through common design elements such as landscaping, signage, and architecture. Comment The application emphasizes the importance of these elements, which should also be reflected in the Design Guidelines. Policy H1.4 Enhance the image of the Town as viewed from Interstate 70 and State Highway 6/24. Comment Staff recommends that the PUD Guide and the Design Guidelines include appropriate standards for setbacks, screening, outdoor storage, lighting, signage, and other design and zoning elements that create a visual impression. Policy H1.5 New development and redevelopment adjacent to I-70 should maintain a sense of openness through preserving significant views from the highway, and landscaping and architectural design. Comment The existing terrain, coupled with the sizeable I-70 right-of-way, virtually ensure conformance with this goal along much of the I-70 corridor. However, staff recommends that the PUD Guide and Design Guidelines include specific zoning standards and design guidelines, particularly for those areas without natural screening. Communication While most citizens are finding less time to attend town meetings, review development proposals, and generally communicate with the Town government, the need for citizens to be informed participants in the community has never been greater. Avon's small size, high land values, well-educated population and seasonal economy means that development and other local governmental decisions are often complex, and generally have greater impacts on the community than they would have in a larger metropolitan area. For these and other reasons, effective communication systems are fundamental to sustaining Avon's high quality of life and economic health. Goal I1 Establish and maintain clear communication between the Town and its citizens, business community, visitors, and other public entities. Policy I1.1 The Town Council and Planning & Zoning Commission will actively seek broad public involvement on key issues and decisions. Policy I1.3 Public meetings, access to documents and development proposals, and other interactions with the Town will be open and accessible as possible. Comment Staff recommends that the Design Guidelines include provisions for kiosks or similar facilities in important public places to post meeting notices and other matters of public interest. Goal I2 Ensure that the Town's infrastructure supports local, regional, state, national and international communication. Policy I2.1 New development and redevelopment will incorporate modern communication infrastructure. Comment Approval of the project, possibly through the PUD Guide or subsequent Subdivision Improvement Standards, should include commitments to include communication infrastructure such as fiber optic cable, multiple telephone lines, extra conduit for future use, and other such technology in the process of constructing the project infrastructure. In addition, construction of all commercial and residential buildings should include at least a minimum standard of communications facilities. Policy I2.2 The Town will work with communication utility providers to review and revise standards of communication infrastructure, and coordinate the timing of expansion of infrastructure. Comment Staff recommends meeting with utility providers and the applicant to clarify the phasing, standards and capacities of the anticipated utility infrastructure created and modified in conjunction with the project. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, the sub-area design recommendations and design guidelines of the Town. The annexation is located in Planning Subarea 19, the I-70 North District, and Subarea 20, the Stolport East District. The Comprehensive Plan states that if Subarea 19 area is developed, attention should be given to I-70 corridor treatments, visual quality and entry way treatments. It also recommends that due to the limited amount of existing trees and shrubs and the open character of the property, special care should be taken to ensure that all structures are compatible with one another and in harmony in the natural surroundings. The specific recommendations for this Subarea 19 are: Amend the existing Architectural and Landscape Design Guidelines for future residential developments to include trail head improvements, pedestrian trails, building clustering, and community amenities. Protect ridgelines from development. The Town and landowners should work together to develop covenants that relate to the Town’s goals. Preserve and enhance open space and trails, incorporate them into future development plans, and explore the possibility of developing additional parcels into pocket parks. Continue to develop the roadways as rural type roads without curb and gutter, roadway lighting, or sidewalks. Comment Large portions of the steeper hillsides are preserved as open space. However, the applicant’s discussion of visual analysis appears to focus on mitigating visual impacts rather than on siting development to avoid visual impacts. The applicant states that the impacts will be mitigated by requiring building design, material and color to blend with terrain, so that homes located on the ridgelines and hillsides will not be as visible. The applicants also state that home sites have been located to avoid steep hillsides visible from the Eagle River Valley Floor, and that the designation of building envelopes within each home site will define the locations of buildings and associated improvements. Revegetation of road construction will minimize the visual impact of cut and fill areas along roadways. Based on the information available, it appears that homes developed on Lots 76-81 may be visible because they appear to be located partially within or adjacent to meadows. Lots 1-5, 6-55, and 60 may also be visible as they appear to be located on upper slopes or ridges, It is difficult to determine from the maps provided how effectively the houses are screened by the Aspen and coniferous forest. The Village is a linear development located along the I-70 corridor and extreme care should be taken to preserve the visual integrity of the corridor, especially the portion of the development north of I-70. Development in RMF-2 and RMF-3, for example, will be very visible from the highway. Specific architectural, zoning and landscape standards need to be incorporated in the PUD Guide and Design Guidelines to minimize the visual impact of development along the I-70 corridor. The phasing plan does not currently address the timing of the park improvements, including the proposed pocket parks. Planning areas RMF-1. RMF-2, and RMF-3 could all benefit from having neighborhood or pocket parks for residents to access without having to cross streets. This is particularly critical in area RMF-1, it if becomes the primary area for attainable housing. Consistent with the Subarea 19 recommendations, the upper roadways are proposed as rural without curb, gutter and sidewalks. Some type of pedestrian and bicycle system should be provided, such as a detached crusher fines trail. Subarea 20 is the Stolport East District. Specific recommendations for this area are: Establish guidelines specific to new development. Maintain open space connections throughout the property. Maintain wide buffers along I-70 to establish a positive visual approach to the Avon gateway, and incorporate setbacks and landscaping along I-70. Comment These recommendations are similar to those for the North District. As has been discussed, specific standards for development along the I-70 corridor need to be developed. The proposed open space connections are good, however the plan should show more clearly a system of pocket parks and/or neighborhood parks in all residential areas. Planning Areas D and F should include pocket and neighborhood parks for residents. If the school (Planning Area G) were to be more centrally located to the residential areas, its playground could satisfy some of the recreational need for the neighborhood. The linear park and trail corridor as shown ends at East Beaver Creek Drive within the project. It should be carried through to the edge of the development, and connect with the existing development, as well as provide for connections with the rail/trail corridor. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation. The PUD Guide should include specific standards to help transition between the project and existing residential neighborhoods including Canyon Run, Avon Crossing, and Eaglebend. These standards should include transitional or stepped building heights, setbacks along the project perimeter, screening and landscaping. Additional standards in the Design Guidelines should include landscaping and screening, orientation and finished design of all sides of the building, parking lot screening, outdoor storage, accessory buildings, and lighting. Uses, activity, and density provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Staff has been working with the applicants to revise the PUD Guide’s list of uses permitted by right and by special review. While the applicant has incorporated some of the recommended changes, the list needs further refinement. Staff feels that uses such as outdoor entertainment or recreation uses, automobile sales, and automobile repair, are generally more effectively permitted through special review. By allowing some of these uses “by right” in areas adjacent to existing development, the PUD Guide does not ensure compatibility between proposed development and existing residential neighborhoods or between different land uses and/or densities proposed for the future. To ensure that each Planning Area develops in with the general character anticipated by the Development Plan, staff recommends an allocation of commercial square footage and residential density for each planning area. The applicants have offered to provide a running tally of development in each Planning Area, but without provision for ensuring the commercial/retail square footage and dwelling units are distributed throughout the development proportionally, or at least to avoid the last parcels having few development rights. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed. The geology report identifies the following geologic hazard areas, which must be mitigated: Lots 1-5 are located in a Class 4 constraint area which is described by the applicant’s geologist as an area not suitable for building sites except locally where the steeper slopes are avoided and debris flow hazard can be mitigated. “These lots are located downhill from steep slopes which could be potential sources of small debris flows.” The upper roads may also be subject to debris flows. The recommended mitigation is deflection berms. Based on these concerns plus being adjacent to one of the few ponds the area, staff questions whether these locations are suitable as building sites, and recommends they be re-located. If they are approved in this location, staff recommends adoption of a specific mitigation plan along with a commitment of the developer to accept liability for damages on these sites. According to the report, damage to the roads is likely and the owner must be willing to accept responsibility for repair. Nottingham Gulch Alluvial fan: Planning areas K, L, N and RMF-1 are located in the Nottingham Gulch alluvial fan, which is a class 3 constraint area and has the potential for flash floods and debris flows. The geologist recommends area wide mitigation to provide a reasonable level of protection for buildings and the safety of their occupants. He notes however, that some property damage will occur as the result of erosion and deposition of mud and debris. Mixed use Planning area M and Planning Area RMF-2 are both located in class 3 and 4 hazard areas, and will be subject to potential debris flows. Part of Planning Area RMF-3 is located in a landslide complex. The geologist recommends development not occur there unless detailed studies show that the landslide is not near a critical stability state. A sinkhole is located in the area of Planning Area M. Development should avoid the area of the sinkhole. Grading on steep slopes: steep slopes are present in some development areas and will have to be specifically evaluated at the time of development for site specific geotechnical engineering studies. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. Most of the development areas and building sites are located outside of steep slopes, which are preserved as open space. A professional, independent visual analysis would be helpful in assessing the visual impacts of the proposed development. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation that is compatible with the town transportation plan. A revised traffic study has been submitted, but does not include a discussion of service levels to determine conformance with Town of Avon standards. The Road standards within the PUD Guide should aslo include information on sidewalk and trails standards. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. See comment under number 6 above. Wildlife could be considered one component of the natural features. The Colorado Division of Wildlife has submitted comments indicating that the development will have significant wildlife impacts due to human activity in general, use of trails, and structures. The Wildlife Mitigation Plan is attached; staff has not yet reviewed it. A copy of this plan was forwarded to the CDOW. The Division’s comments are attached to this report. According to CDOW, remaining elk habitat is becoming more important as development pressure occurs. The Village contains critical Elk Habitat. The entire area north of I-70 is elk habitat including three areas of severe winter range, and excellent elk calving habitat. Lot 60 is in the middle of an undisturbed block of winter range and would have less impact if it were clustered in a development pod. A wildlife buffer could be provided, but hiking and dogs would need to be contained to be effective. Deer migration occurs across the entire parcel. The migration across this site is critical due to its proximity to the I-70 underpass, and the southern exposures of the site. Blockage of the corridor on this site would likely affect deer populations in the upper Eagle Valley including Vail Pass, Redcliff, and Red Sandstone. Adequate migration corridors should be preserved across the property. According to CDOW, the 800-foot minimum corridor agreed to in 1995 may not be sufficient. Large migration corridors may be needed, particularly in areas of deciduous trees and shrubs where leaf cover is not sufficiently thick to provide cover during spring and fall migrations. Roads should be located and designed so as to minimize crossing, as each crossing increases the risk of deer/auto accidents. Roads also need to include spanning bridges and minimize cut and fill. Building sites may need to be more clustered to reduce impacts on deer and elk. DOW is concerned with the location of Lots 59, 64, 74, and 85, all of which are located within approximately 100 feet of the forest boundary. CDOW believes these lots should be moved back to at least 125 feet. Based on experience in Wildridge and Mountain Star, conflicts between homeowners and wildlife as well as forest recreational users will occur. Lot 74 is located in a migratory corridor and may impact the movement of deer. Mitigation is a last resort and not all impacts can be mitigated. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of future project phases. The phasing plan describes that the first phase of development will include portions of the Village Center, RMF-2, some of the single-family lots north of I-70, and portions of the Neighborhood and Regional Centers. The Village Center and RMF-2 are the most logical areas for the first phase of development given that they have the closest proximity to existing Town limits. Staff does not object to this phasing plan, provided that adequate road access can be provided to the Neighborhood and Regional centers. One of the main issues raised during the initial public meeting is how construction traffic will be handled so that existing businesses and residences are not unduly impacted. A secondary access from Highway 6 will help to address this concern. However, if the main construction access is from Highway 6, then businesses and residences along Highway 6/24 will be impacted. If construction access is from East Beaver Creek Boulevard, then businesses, residences and residents within the east side shopping area will be most impacted. Restriction on the hours of construction may help to address some of these concerns. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection. The service plans for the provision of public services are being evaluated separately. According to the plans there is sufficient available capacity of all utilities. A school site (Planning Area G) is being reserved for the School District. We sent referrals to all utility and service providers. We have received letters from the Eagle County Ambulance District indicating the need for an ambulance site near the proposed interchange. No other service concerns have been expressed by the referral agencies to date. That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD. The traffic study should address levels of service, including Avon’s adopted LOS (Level of Service) C. An updated traffic study has been submitted but it does not include this analysis. 17.20.110.I. Development Standards Development Standards including lot area, site dimensions, setbacks, height, density control, site coverage, landscaping and parking shall be determined by the town council as part of the approved development plan with consideration of the recommendation of the Planning commission. Comment Development standards are included in the PUD Guide. The draft included in this meeting packed contains Design Guidelines and Parking Regulations. Specific standards that staff has discussed with the applicant include: Lot area: Minimum lot areas need to be specified for each planning area. Site dimensions: To be addressed at time of review of individual applications. Setbacks: Some of these are included in the PUD Guide. Of particular concern are setbacks for the rail corridor, and adjacent to existing residential areas to help provide a buffer. Building height: Staff has requested that areas adjacent to existing development, the rail corridor, and, in some locations, adjacent to I-70, require transitional building heights to reduce impacts. Density: Densities should be based on developable area. The current Town regulations exclude slopes of more than 40% from site area in calculating density. Site coverage: This should be addressed in the PUD Guide. Higher site coverages are appropriate for areas such as Village Center. Multi-family residential areas outside of the Village Center would have lower percentages, to ensure that open space and play areas are provided. Landscaping: Minimum landscaped area requirements should be incorporated in the PUD Guide. In the Village Center and other dense Planning Areas, staff recommends allowing walkways to count toward landscaped areas, in contrast to the existing Town regulations. Separate requirements should be established for single family homesites north of I-70. Preserving the natural vegetation should be emphasized, with just enough formal landscaping to transition between the homes and the natural surroundings. Parking: The proposed parking regulations were received late Friday morning. Referrals Please see attached referral sheet and comments from agencies which have responded to date. Initial Public Comment On August 4, 1998, the Planning & Zoning Commission conducted a public input meeting to gain input earlier in the process, prior to the Commission making a recommendation to Council. Following is a summary of the comments provided at the meeting: Lyn Morgan, General Manager for Eagle County Ambulance District, said the District provides paramedic and transport services for the eastern half of Eagle County. He said by looking at this annexation in its early stages, it gives them (the District) an opportunity to improve service as it exists today. This annexation could provide them the area needed to put a third station in a central location that could help to improve their response times to about 5 different parts of the community including Eagle Vail Business and residential, Minturn, I-70 between Dowd Junction and Avon, and the Beaver Creek Community. Mr. Morgan pointed out that when you look an the number of units and multiply that by the number of people anticipated, the numbers are not insignificant; but if you look at the net increase of people that this would bring to the valley it is fairly easy to determine what the impact would be. The annexed area could give Eagle County an opportunity for improving the overall system as well as addressing the impacts that this project would present to public safety service providers. Jon Dwight read to the Commission a letter written by Mr. Jimmy Heuga, which stated “I want to express my enthusiasm for The Village at Avon project. I have been familiar with the Eagle Valley since 1968, and I feel a strong appreciation for this area. I am also aware that development is inevitable and my concern is that growth be done well. Environmental issues such as wet lands, wildlife, migration, wilderness access, general ecology, and the area’s natural beauty must be taken into consideration. In reviewing the plans for The Village at Avon project I am delighted with the concern they have shown for the environmental issues. I am enthused over the amenities for the project as I find it adds to the communities and addresses the concerns I have for preserving the beauty of the area. The features appear to be broad enough to include the interests and needs of the community while preserving our desire to retain the beauty of the land. I enthusiastically recommend this project.” Michael Ruggie, Vail valley resident for 5 years, said he would like to speak in support of The Village at Avon. As a resident and a consumer he thinks the increased retail and housing options made available by this project will increase the quality of life in the entire Vail Valley. He said he would encourage the Town of Avon to see this project through to its completion. Chris Neuswanger, a resident in the Vail Valley for about 20 years, said the whole process is going far too quickly. He said there is virtually no information given out to the public, and not enough time for the public to digest it. This makes for a very serious credibility issue for the Town of Avon. There should something very similar to the Eagle County review process where the developer is there on site and people can ask questions. Mr. Neuswanger said that segregation of employee housing is in direct conflict to every community in the valley including Avon. He said there should be a public discussion and some information given out as to the projected price ranges. The price ranges according to Bill Post were going to be affordable: 80% of the median income in the County, and they were not. He said he called the County to find out if this formula worked with the wages, and they flat out do not work. He said the developer neglected to include things in the calculations such as mortgage insurance, condominium fees, or the fact that people might have credit card or automobile payments. Mr. Neuswanger also questioned whether 80 foot tall buildings are proper for this area, and said that zero set backs between the buildings and the core area is not appropriate, and that nobody else in the Town of Avon would be allowed to do that. He said that there needs to be discussion with the Fire Department as to the fire protection particularly on the hillsides north of I-70. He said he has serious doubts about the traffic projections. He said he does not think that the Town should allow them to have their own design review committee as this totally cuts out everybody in this community (Avon) from any say as to what is approved for the Village at Avon. Mr. Neuswanger later commented that people that build duplexes in Town have to go through more of a review process than this annexation has. John Haley, Manager of City Market in Avon, said his concerns are about the traffic. As of now the traffic is very heavy on a day to day basis. With construction traffic going through there, this is going to create a problem especially if the I-70 interchange won’t be put in for another 4 years. He said the square footage for the retail is too large of an area and it will bottle neck that whole area around City Market. Ben Rose, Vail Valley resident for 20 years, said he thinks this is a great project for the entire Valley. Rick Cuny, resident and business owner in Avon longer than it has been a town, said his concern is the size of the project. He said he could not visualize construction traffic going by his store for the next 10 to 20 years. He said he does not think the amount of businesses being proposed will be supported by the number of people in the community. From a business person’s point of view he respects the developer, but would encourage the project to be developed in a different way such as tax incentives or tax relief but the same time not impact the Town of Avon in such a great way. Robin Pieters, a business owner and 20 year resident, said she would love to see the interchange be put in before the project begins. She said she would like to have a traffic consultant hired to do a traffic study. Traffic should only be allowed to come into the town only through the I-70 corridor not by way of Hwy 6. She said she has concerns about the employee housing which is to be located on the North side of I-70. She asked how these employees are to get to the core of Avon without getting in their cars and driving. She expressed concern that P&Z does not have enough information. She asked the Commission to make the right decision. Ms. Pieters later commented said that not everyone is confused about the project., as implied by Mr. Post. Larry Kilstrup, business owner in Avon and a resident in Eagle Vail, said he is greatly in favor of annexation, but what we have here is not an annexation. There are a number of issues in terms of employee housing, traffic, density, etc. He said the finance plan is basically the same scheme that the developer put forth for stand-alone projects within the County. He said that if you (the Commission and members of the audience) have not read the annexation agreement, you should because it is a commitment of the majority of real-estate transfer tax and sales taxes for 25 years to finance this project for this developer. Mr. Kilstrup said that this is absurd in letting a private community set up beside us and not pay taxes. He said that the agreement reads as intergovernmental agreement, not an Annexation. Lynn Weas, Managing Director of Christie Lodge for 10 years and agent for some 14,000-property owners, said this project is reminding him of the Israeli’s wandering the desert for 40 years: It seems to be going from one area to another to another area. Mr. Weas said he didn’t think the proper bodies have given the proper thought to the true impact of this project: 2400 housing units and a commercial space the size of Cherry Creek Mall, and with the natural growth of the Town of Avon, it will act as a catalyst for surrounding developments. When you review this (proposal) with common sense, the resulting difficulty of getting around and the depletion of quality of life means this is just not a good idea. He said that if the Town wants to annex this piece of property, it should be annexed like a piece of property, and shouldn’t be annexed with markers attached to it. He said he would not tolerate construction traffic going by the Christie Lodge. Not matter what it takes he said he will not allow it. The people at Christie Lodge deserve not to have their space ruined. As for the financing of this project, it is extremely wrong. He said that we don’t want to pay for the fire department, ambulance service, etc and since when do we have to pick up the tax bill for 1400 homeowners. Conclusions The Village at Avon PUD application complies with the Avon Comprehensive plan in many respects. The size of the project is reduced compared with that proposed to Eagle County. The comments in this report tend to address the level of information provided, moreso than concerns about the quality of the project. We also realize that many of the comments in this report, and particularly in the following list, are probably addressed in the revised draft PUD Guide. However, based on the review to date, staff believes that the following should be addressed before a final recommendation of approval can be made: The PUD Guide must be complete regarding such standards as setbacks, landscaping and other buffering, noise and lighting standards, drive-through facilities, outdoor storage, accessory buildings, minimum lot sizes, and general provisions. The PUD Guide should reflect a balance of uses by right and special review uses. The PUD Guide should include specific standards for development adjacent to existing residential areas, the I-70 corridor, and the railroad corridor. Parking regulations should be provided for review. The Design Review Guidelines must be reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. The wildlife mitigation plan must be reviewed by the Colorado Division of Wildlife as well as by Town staff. It is strongly recommended that Lots 1-6 be removed or re-located due to their location in a potential debris flow, given recent experience in the Town of Vail. If development must be approved in these areas, staff recommends that the Development Agreement or other legal instrument include a provision to relieve the Town of any responsibility, and establish a fund or assessment to mitigate slope failure. Staff would prefer that a traffic study including an analysis and discussion on service levels be provided. However, an alternative would be to follow provisions of the adopted 1996 Transportation Plan Update. The Annexation Agreement should include commitments for parks, recreation, and trails facilities, including phasing of improvements. Provisions for deed restricted units including maximum sale price, appreciation caps, down payment, residency and employment restrictions, should be included in the Annexation Agreement or a separate housing agreement. The Planning & Zoning Commission has requested that the applicant provide a terrain model or equivalent, to help assess the visual impacts, including ridgeline development. Staff Recommendation At the August 11 meeting, the Town Council tabled, until August 25, the Annexation, PUD zoning, and Annexation Agreement ordinances because the applicant would not agree to construct the full-diamond interchange within the 4 year time frame and associated conditions proposed by Town Council. The Council nonetheless directed the application forwarded to the Planning & Zoning Commission for its review and recommendation. Staff is reviewing the revised PUD Guide submitted Friday,in anticipation of Tuesday’s meeting. If it appears that the new draft effectively addresses the items listed above, staff will recommend approval. A more realistic approach, however, would be for the Commission to review the project, hold the public hearing, and table action on the application until September 1, or schedule a special meeting prior to September. Respectfully submitted, Karen Griffith, AICP Town Planner Michael Matzko Director of Community Development