PZC Minutes 021881RECORDS OF PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
FEBRUARY 18, 1981 7:30 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Design Review Board for the Town of Avon was held on
February 18, 1981 at 7:35 P. M. in the Town Council Chambers of the Town of Avon
in the Benchmark Shopping Center, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order
by Chairman Bill Pierce.
All Board Members were present.
Item #1, Christie Lodge, U. S. Home Corporation, Parking for Building 8, Lot 25,
Block 2, Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 80-4-1.
There was no one present to represent Christie Lodge.
Item #2, J. W. Skinner and Associates, Special Use Review, Office Building,
Lots 30 and 31, Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 81-1-8.
Bob Armon represented J. W. Skinner. Currently these lots are zoned Industrial/
Commercial, the change requested is to put in general office space. They have
already started proceedings to vacate the lot line. There are approximately
44,000 square feet of office space, for further details of the building, please
refer to the minutes of February 4, 1981.
The Town has received no letters or other communication against this proposal.
Bill asked for comments from the audience. This will be general commercial office
space, not retail. Henry Wolff asked if the offices might be medical, they will
not. Dick stated that any changes from general commercial might change the parking.
There being no objections, Ken made the motion to recommend to the Town Council
that the zoning change be accepted for this project. Larry seconded the motion,
and it was passed unanimously.
Item #7, High Country Plaza, M & N Associates, Hardware Store and Offices, Lot
3, Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 81-1-6.
Cancelled - February 17, 1981.
AND Signs, File No. 81-2-3.
Tom Nevison represented High Country Plaza. He is proposing development signs
for this project, the signs conform to the new Sign Ordinance. The signs will
be done by the company which made the signs for the Charter in Beaver Creek.
The development sign will be a painted sign, installed for as long as it takes to
complete the project. They will come before the Board for review for the hard-
wood signs when they present the building itself. The development sign will be
7/8 inch plywood, on 4 X 4, not to exceed the eight foot limitation and not to
exceed the 16 square foot limit, on one side only.
Bill suggested a 1 X 4 frame around the sign. Ken made the motion to approve
this sign, to be removed at the time of final occupancy, for the construction
time only. Tom seconded the motion and it was passed unanimously.
Item #3, Ken Sortland, Four Units, Lot 87, Block 1, Woldridge Subdivision, File
No. 81-2-4.
Ken Sortland and Peter Lawton represented this project, to be called Woodridge.
The four units will be staggered, southeast orientation. Each unit has a garage,
-1-
additional parking spaces will be to the north, approximately 6,400 square feet
for the four units, three levels, top level will be a loft, the height is 33
feet, a three foot drop between each unit, two smaller units in the center.
The building company is Acorn Homes from Massachusetts, not modular construction.
Peter presented slides of homes they have built. Materials - all decks are
vertical green fir, the trim is white pine, 1 X 4 atlantic white cedar, verti-
cal, soffits are redwood,four or three inch. Roofing - would like a bird as-
phalt shingle, they will bring in a sample, the guidelines for Wildridge do not
normally accept asphalt shingles, they requested that judgement be reserved until
the sample is seen.
The decks will have open ballisters, solid on the end. There will be moss rock
fireplaces, river rock wall on the outside at the entrance locations, the wall
comes out into the landscaping. Siding - 1 X 4 atlantic white cedar, tongue
and groove, stain will be earthtone, the number will be supplied at the next
meeting.
Pella windows will be used, the exact color is needed. There will be open panels
used, four feet with occasional two foot panels, will not be pre -sided. The
chimney finishing is unknown at this time.
Landscaping - small sodded area in front of each townhouse, two retaining walls,
each unit will have a patio, trees and shrubs on each end, some boulders on the
backside of the parking area, lighting behind the boulders. Lighting - on the.
exterior face of the garages, recessed cans underneath the entrances areas.
The garage doors will be wood, kind unknown.
The overhang required is 18 inches - if there are overhangs they must meet this
requirement. Trash - retainers will be inside each garage. The skylights are
fixed glass. The roof over the entrances - Paul Ecklund asked if there is some-
thing to prevent ice and snow dropping in the entrances, a cold roof will be
installed to prevent that problem, the overhang also protects the entrance.
Bill asked for comments from the audience and there weren't any. The landscaping,
site plan, check on the overhangs, shingles, bring in materials and stain number
will be required for the next meeting.
Item #4, Balas Investments, Balas Phase II, Zoning Variance, Lot 7, Block 1,
Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 81-1-11.
Nanzio Casalino and Fritz Schmidt represented Balas Phase II. The easement on
the east property line has been encroached upon by 32 feet by a corner of the
foundation. They have received letters from all the utility companies (copies
are in the Town files) granting approvals, with the exception of Public Service
which is not in that easement.
The encroachment is about 24 square feet. The Town Engineer recommended that
since there is a sewer line in there, that three feet of easement be added from
Lot 6, Block 1 maintaining the 15 foot working easement there. The distance
between the two buildings on Lot 6 and Lot 7 is 22 feet, the Fire Department
has no objection to the variance.
The telephone and electric lines are also in that easement at this time. The
building goes straight up from the foundation there, the overhang is slight.
This variance will not affect Lot 8 at all.
Bill asked for comments from the audience and there weren't any. Larry stated
that the Mountain Bell letter reads "revocable", perhaps they should try to get
that changed.
Mike made the motion to recommend to the Town Council that the easement vacation
and the additional land on the opposite side of the encroachment be established
and that it is done in accordance or recognition of the letters from the utility
companies. Tom seconded the motion. Dick stated that this will have to be
shown on their mylar,one to the east of that as a change and the other easement
and lot line in question will have to show that they have vacated that.
-2-
Before a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued a mylar will be required
for each piece of property. There are two parts to this - vacation
of tie easement and the side yard variance.
Mike modified his motion to include the filing of an amended plat. The modi-
fied motion for vacation of the easement was voted on and it passed unanimously.
The side yard setback - Larry made the motion to approve the side yard variance
or to make that recommendation to the Town Council on the condition that the
distance between any two buildings on the two adjacent properties of this parti-
cular property line never be allowed to encroach or to be closer together than
15 feet or to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall. Alice seconded the motion
and it was passed unanimously.
NOT ON THE AGENDA: Vail Associates Real Estate, Sign, Benchmark Building, Tract
Q, Benchmark Subdivision.
This item was heard about two meetings ago, it was not approved at that time.
Bob West represented Vail Associates Real Estate. This sign will be 8 X 3 feet,
extruded aluminum cabinet, painted in an oxford brown, letters will be painted
not carved, ivory plexi-glass, 3/16 inches thick, borders will be signal red
with an orange accent.
Bill stated that the size of the frame that is there is the maximum size sign
the Board will approve, 3 X 8 feet is larger than that. Bob stated that the
existing frmae is 8 feet by 30 inches, they would also like to move the sign closer
to the main entrance to their office.
The Board will allow a sign the same size as the frame that is there, and will
ask the Building Administrator to affirm the size. Bill stated that the Board
will approve a sign for Vail Associates Real Estate to be of the exact same size
as the frame that is currently on the building, that size will be verified by the
Building Inspector before the sign is installed.
Item #6, Allwerth, Inc., Special Review for Time Sharing, Lot 60, Block 2, Bench-
mark Subdivision, File No. 81-2-2.
Bill Pierce stepped down to represent Allwerth, Inc., along with John Blish.
Mike, as Chairman, asked if public notice has been made; it has, with no returned
objections.
There are two levels of underground parking with spaces for 160 cars. The first
level is commercial, retail space, lobby, office. Check -in parking with 15 spaces,
two loading docks, two trash pick-up locations. The utilities are located in
the 10 foot setback on the south property line, drainage is somewhat of a problem.
They are trying for a tie-in for the pedestrians from the mall. There is approxi-
mately 15,000 square feet of commercial space.
Landscaping - mountain ash and locusts will be used, they will be large trees.
Lighting - classical style along the front. There are two types of units, each
approximately 1,800 square feet, three bedrooms, kitchens, two bathrooms. Each
unit can be rented all together, or in portions.
The building is seven stories high in the middle, down to four or five on the
ends. Materials - stucco, wood railings, glass and metal roof, the color is unknown.
Mike stated that tonight's meeting is about time sharing, not about the site plan
or building features. Proper application has not been made for a preliminary
hearing.
John Blish preferred the term "advanced reservation" rather than "time sharing",
the right to use. Because of the railroad crossing and the shape of the lot,
they would like to market for the middle level person. There will be a swimming
pool, jacuzzi, ski storage lockers. Cheryl asked if a specific week would be
bought, or buying a unit with advanced reservations through a broker.
-3-
John stated that specific weeks will be bought. They will guarantee for a certain
sum of money paid according to a certain sort of description a reservation for
"X" number of years. The building will continue to be owned by the developer.
The building will be run this way for at least 20 years, may then be turned into
condominiums and sold as such. Robert Strauss, one of the owners, stated that
the units will not be rented out for 52 weeks per year for maintenance purposes.
He also stated that the leases will be for 40 years each. At that time, it may
become condominiums, separately owned.
Cheryl: are there other projects like this in Colorado? Torn: can a unit be
split down the middle and sold as such, if so, the parking ratio would be affected.
Can be rented with one or two lock -off units. There is a potential for 150 ac-
comodation units rather than 50 units and would be about 450 square feet each.Tom:
finds problems with this concept.
They are proposing approximately 15,000 square feet of commerical space, 50
units, 175 parking spaces, more than required. One parking space is required
for every accomodation unit.
Mike stated that it is important to identify just how many units are being dis-
cussed, and therefore how many shares. The units have to do with site coverage
and paring requirements. Mike: talking about 50 accomodation units? Bill:
talking about 50 units of 1,800 square feet, 50 dwelling units.
Jim Robertson, one of the principals, stated that they have studied many projects
like this one. He believes that normally the entirety of each unit will be
bought by the same family for the same week. The owner of a unit does not have
the authority to rent parts of a unit out himself. If the owner does not use
his unit during the week he owns, the owner of the building can rent that unit,
or parts of a unit, to someone else. The commercial space will be kept by the
owner, not sold.
The prices for the units will be comparable to similar projects in Vail, i.e.,
a three bedroom, three bath unit in prime ski season will cost about $17,000.
Norm Lamb mentioned that this will be a "right to use". He asked who would
get the income from renting a unit not being used by its owner. Jim stated that
the owner has the right to use a unit and if he can not due to some problem in
the family the income would be at least split with the owner. In a given year
18% of people do not show up to use their unit. At this time they do not belong
to an exchange club (Laurie McMurray).
Paul Ecklund: units will be sold only as three bedroom units? Jim states that
smaller units can be sold. Paul: there would be only 50 sales? Jim: conceivably
can sell more than 50 units.
Dick Evans: there are two factors - 1) total sellout could be 150, 2) since the
Ordinance on time sharing is relatively new, a work study session be held before
a decision is made. The Board would like to meet with the Town Council and the
Town Attorney to discuss the Ordinance and time sharing before a decision is made.
As Chairman, Mike ruled that time sharing purposes, they are talking about 50
units, time sharing only, not site planning or parking requirements. The Board
is not ready at this time to make a recommendation for or against time sharing.
After discussion, the Board set a special meeting for Wednesday night, February
25, 1981 to meet with the Town Council and Town Attorney at 7:30 P. M. This is
a public meeting. The site plan will be on the agenda for the next regular meeting
(March 4, 1981). The secretary will notify the Board Members and invite the
Council and the Town Attorney to the special meeting.
General discussion followed. Empire Savings: to open in six or seven months
with their permanent building, no temporary building will be constructed. Buck
Creek Plaza: letters, the problems incurred in changing a living unit to commer-
cial officers. Savoy Square: the restaurant size and the parking variances.
-4-
The minutes were read and discussed. Ken made the motion to approve the minutes
of January 21, 1981 with the correction on page 6 (22 floors to 2 floors) and
the minutes of February 4, 1981. Alice seconded the motion and it was passed
unanimously.
Other business - Front setbacks: After considerable discussion, it was decided
to leave the definition of front setbacks as is - multi -street property lines
are decided at the discretion of the Board.
There being no further business to be brought before the Board, Mike made the
motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded by Tom, passed unanimously and the
meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P. M.
Respectfully submitted by:
erre Sortlan
ecording Secretary
Design Review Board
-5-