PZC Minutes 082080RECORD OF' PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING
AUGUST 20, 1980, 7:30 P.M.
The regular meeting of the Design Review Board for the Town of Avon
was held on August 20, 1980 at 8:00 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 with the exception of Mike Blair
and Alice Alpi.
The reading of the minutes was deferred until later in the meeting.
Item #8, Avon Center at Beaver Creek, Some Changes to the Grading
Plan,was added to tonight's agenda.
Item #1, Wolff Warehouses, Special Review Use, Lot 23, Block 1,
Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 80-8-1.
Eddie Daniels and Henri Wolff represented Wolff Warehouses. They
would like to add two offices upstairs, rather than putting them
downstairs. There would be two outside entrances, up the stairways.
They would like to raise the whole upper deck two feet and add four
windows facing south. The added portion will be brown brick.
The tenants of the offices will not be separate from the tenants
of the warehouses. There will be 1,300 square feet of office space.
This Special Review Use was originally submitted as an added living
unit. That idea was abandoned due to density requirements in the
Town of Avon.
There is a question regarding the amount of parking. The Zoning
Ordinance needs to be checked to see if the parking is still ade-
quate, given the extra office space. The warehouse has 15 parking
spaces (12.5 are required), three or four added spaces will be needed
for the extra office space.
The general concensus of the Board is that the brown brick is accept-
able, without definition around the added windows. Tonight's request
is acceptable, but the parking needs to be checked out before approval
can be granted. If the extra parking space cannot be added, they
will just have a taller warehouse without the office space upstairs.
The Board *requested that the Building Administrator make a zoning
check of the proposed change, that the general asthetic changes
to the building are acceptable to the Board and (the Board) will
be willing to re -review this at the next meeting based on Dick's
calculations.*
Item #2, Benchmark Discount Liquors, Sign, Lot 72, Block 2, Benchmark
Subdivision, File No. 80-8-4.
Louis Jordan and Rick Cuny represented Benchmark Discount Liquors.
They would like to put up a sign of individual letters, flat black,
brushed aluminum, spelling "Liquor". The sign would be on the west
side of the building.
Ken Hardwick mentioned the sign code which is in the process of being
written, and suggested that a sign could be put in the window until
the sign code is passed.
-1-
The letters will be mounted on posts and will be raised off the
wall about two inches. There is no backing on the sign, the letters
will be mounted separately on the stucco wall. The size of the
sign was taken from the formula used in the Benchmark Architec-
tural Control Committee Sign Code. By this formula they would be
allowed 22 square feet of sign, the sign they are proposing is 16
square feet. They will be moving into their_ new business location
around the loth of September, 1980. They plan on spot lighting the
sign.
The Board would like to see the actual material from which the letters
will be made, a drawing of the lighting and the sign to read "Beaver
Liquors" (name of the business) rather than "Liquor". The size
is to be a maximum of 20 square feet. They will return to the
September 3, 1980 meeting.
Item #3, Chambertin, Zoning Variance, Lots 46 and 47, Block 1,
Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 80-7-3.
Howard LaGarde' represented Chambertin. Howard explained the back-
ground which leads to his request tonight. He would like a zoning
variance to approve the 20 foot front setback from the road rather
than the 25 foot setback required under the Zoning Ordinance.
A gabian retaining wall is to be constructed along the road where
the present two buildings of this project are located.
Dick Evans stated that the 20 foot setback was never approved by
the Design Review Board or the Town Council. Howard stated that
the approved working drawings show a 20 foot setback. He also
stated that the easements are in the right-of-way, they are not in
his setback.
Bill asked for comments from the audience and there weren't any.
Howard will bring the two future buildings of this project before
the Board because although the site was approved for them, they
cannot be built.
The Board will favorably approve Howard's request and due to the
change of the road right-of-way Howard will resubmit a site plan
to the Board at a later date for Lot 47. Larry made the motion
that the Board *recommend to the Town Council to approve the vari-
ance for allowing a 20 foot front yard setback for Lots 46 and 47,
Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision as described here tonight, on the
basis that a satisfactory retaining wall as approved by the Town
Buiding Department be complete subject to approval by the Town
Engineer.* Ken Hardwick seconded the motion and it was passed
unanimously. Howard will come back with Lot 47 site plan including
a 25 foot setback.
Later in the meeting: For the first building to comply with the
Town's rules and regulations, Chambertin will have to build a
gabian wall. Jim wells stated that *in front of their building,
that cut, they made. That cut is right on the edge of the roadway
easement.* He does not believe there is 20 feet from there to the
edge of their buiding. Larry stated that his earlier motion for
approval was for a 20 foot setback. If it is substantially less,
then they do not have approval yet. His motion for recommendation
is *contingent upon them providing a retaining wall... approved by
the Town Engineer.* Jim stated that the distance between the edge
of their patio and the edge of that roadway is about eight feet.
He believes a fence is necessary. Dick stated that they would have
to have a proper health, life and safety barricade.
Jim and Dick: The building was not built where it was supposed
to be built. Larry stated that his recommendation was based on the
belief that the 20 foot setback was due to -the Town's error in
-2-
its early, developing stages. He amended his earlier motion *to
include that we also request an improvement survey be prepared
prior to requesting approval from the Town Council on this issue
of the building location so that it can be compared with what their
site plan shows, and if in fact it is in the place where they
showed it.* This information is to be available to the Town Council.
Larry summarized his motion: *I move that we amend the previous
recommendation to the Town Council that they approve the 20 foot
setback with one additional requirement indicating that an improve-
ment survey be prepared and submitted to the Town Council showing
that in fact the buiding is in the same location as shown on the
design documents.* Cheryl seconded the motion and it was passed
unanimously.
Item #4, Troxel Warehouses, Wood Facia Plans, Lot 13, Block 1,
Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 79-3-1.
Keith Troxel represented Metcalf Venture (Troxel Warehouse).
Keith stated that to date they have *installed Russian Olive trees
on the north side of the warehouse, added topsoil on the slope,
reseeded the slope and put straw on a sixty foot section.* They
have planted some small bushes, 22 feet high and numbering 20 -
that section will be reseeded soon. *The section in front cannot
be done at the present time because the wall has not been installed.*
The rest of the project will have to be approved before the rest
of the landscaping can be installed. Building K is not situated
as it was when approved, it was approved situated as Buiding J is.
Tonight's meeting is to review the landscaping and/or facia only,
not Building K. Larry stated that *Building K and the redesign of
the plot plan involves the cross -access between sites.*
Keith stated that they will probably allow easements through the
property (Lots 11-13) and not vacate the lot lines. The wall in
front of Building J will be constructed when the new road is approved,
which will be in about 30 days. Dirt on Lot 11 will be pushed
down to make the new road flat. Bill reiterated his request from
a prior meeting that an overall plan of the entire project be sub-
mitted and reviewed. He also stated that the Board should make one
final trip to view the warehouse and make a final decision since the
*landscaping they intend to put in immediately adjacent to the building
is in. The main thing which would make the modification would be
the Russian Olive trees.* The final decision will be made at the
September 3, 1980 meeting. A field trip will be made before that
meeting. Keith stated that he or Mr. Eison (engineer) will be pre-
sent at that meeting.
Public input: Diane Boyer, owner of Lots 14 and 15 presented pic-
tures of the landscaping installed at the warehouse which were taken
at 5:00 P.M. on this date. She voiced her disapproval of the land-
scaping. George Boyer, part owner of Lots 14 and 15 also discussed
D & E Towing and Beaver Creek Automotive Special Use Permits.
He mentioned that Beaver Creek Automotive is working with the door
open and has four cars parked outside - both are not allowed by
their permit.
The Board Members discussed the status of their request to recommend
to the Town Council the revocation of these Special Use Permits due
to violations. Dick Evans stated that the Town Council has .received
a letter stating the above and has taken the matter under considera-
tion. Jim Wells stated that the Council instructed the Building
Administrator to issue the Certificates of Occupancy if the building
is safe to occupy, with all conditions these businesses have to
meet and a time frame for compliance.
Item #5, Holy Cross Electric Association, Materials Yard, Lot 10,
Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 80-6-3.
Howard Scarboro represented Holy Cross Electric Association. They
would like to keep the rocks, posts and other non -living types of
=19
landscaping because sod and trees would require maintenance which
would be cost prohibitive.
Bill asked for comments from the audience and there weren't any.
Larry explained that the Board would like sod and trees with
sprinkling system, perhaps tied in with the property to the south.
Holy Cross was asked at the last meeting to present such a plan at
tonight's meeting. Holy Cross would rather not put in the sod be-
cause of the maintenance involved. Bill stated that sod is required
in the Design Review Board regulations.
Board Members: Larry would like the landscaping suggested by the
Board to dress up the open storage - a finished product. This is
on the road to Wildridge and Wildwood. He believes that this is
a good compromise. Cheryl: the Ordinance (#78-9) states that sod
and landscaping are required, there can be no exceptions. Tom:
some sod and high trees to break up the fence, also shrubs, maybe
rocks and a sprinkling system. Ken: the fence is acceptable,
landscaping is needed. Bill: is opposed to open storage, an abun-
dance of landscaping may make it acceptable.
Holy Cross Electric will be on the agenda for the next meeting
(September 3, 1980) to present a landscaping plan.
Bill asked for comments from the audience. Jim Wells stated that
Holy Cross was going to check on dressing up the existing fence.
That fence is owned by the Colorado Ute Company and is on land owned
by Holy Cross. When the land was first purchased, Holy Cross planned
to construct a warehouse. Jim supports open storage, but would
like to dress up the area and the existing fence with landscaping.
Nothing can be done to the fence itself short of replacing it.
Pete Ventres asked if approval for the new :fence is contingent on
whether anything is done to the old fence. Jim suggested that this
could be part of the compromise. Bill stated that tonight's rea_uest
may be viewed more favorably if the existing fence treatment is
included.
Item #6, Stevens Development Company, Duplex, Lot 44, Block 1, Wild -
ridge Subdivision, File No. 80-8-3.
Gary Stevens represented Stevens Development Company. Doyle's
Masonry will be the general contractor. There will be a considerable
amount of river rock used, the siding will be beetle kill pine with
Olympic stain #908. There will be a sprinkler system with sod in
front, two private driveways, a one car garage and two parking
spaces for each unit. 15 aspen trees 10-12 feet high, three juni-
per around the entries. The soffits will be the same as the siding.
The overhang, wood deck will be redwood decking." Outdoor lighting -
porch light for the front door, by the garage, a pole light by the
driveway. There is an entry from the garage to the house. Ken would
like a pole light along the walkway and steps to the house. The
Board would like more trees, especially in the back. Dick asked
if this design met all the requirements of the Wildridge covenants.
Gary stated that it does as far as tie knows.
Larry asked about the function of the covenants committee for Wild -
ridge. Jim stated that the committee defers to the Design Review
Board of the Town of Avon *unless it decides that the Design Review
Board has made a decision that does not agree with them... the
committee defers totally to the Design Review Board. If there is
something that the Board makes a decision on that the committee
does not agree with then it can take it's own action.*
The Board: Add three evergreens on the front side on one side and
two on the other and six more aspen to the northeast corner and
at the southwest corner of the building. The Building Administrator
will check if sprinkler systems are required where there is sod.
-4-
The Board would also like Gary to submit any free-standing light
fixtures. Gary can leave a brochure of the lighting fixtures with
Dick. The Board granted *final approval with the stipulation that
Gary adds five evergreens and six aspen to the project distributed
as discussed and if he intends to use outside pole lighting he would
submit that information to the Building Official and he will transfer
that information to the Board at the next meeting for their_ review.*
Item #8, Avon Center at Beaver Creek, Revisions to the Grading
Plan, Lots 47-54, Block 2, Benchmark Subdivision, File No. 79-11-5.
Bill McCoy represented Avon Center. There are two alternatives
for drainage to meet the requirements for drainage and retention
set forth by the Town Engineer: raise West Beaver Creek Blvd. five
feet to protect 'the property, or re-route the drainage around the
lot. They prefer to re-route the drainage. As it now stands, the
natural drainage would flow across their property and down the ramps
into the underground garage. They propose to revise the grading
plan up two feet, which will protect the property from the natural
drainage and gives a level driveway into the street. It also raises
the platform so that it interfaces with the sewage. The grading
around the building would stay the same. The entry is now two
feet below the street, it would be level with the street. In some
areas, the property will still be about three: feet below the street.
The surface parking will be changed from 21 spaces to almost 35
spaces for Phase I. They have the room without needing variances
for the added spaces.
Dick stated that Avon Center is working very closely with the Town
Engineer, they came up with this solution and he thinks it solves
many problems. The Board requested that Avon Center_ forward to
them a letter from the Town Engineer verifying that this is a re-
commended solution.
Avon Center hopes to apply for a partial permit by mid -September.
The Board granted *approval with a letter from the Town Engineer
stating the reasons for this request as it relates to the flood
plain study and submit prior to getting the foundation permit the
revised grading plan and the plans showing how the parking would
be revised for compliance in Phase I.*
Bill asked for input from the audience regarding items not listed
on the agenda.
Item #7, Certificates of Occupancy.
The Board discussed the paper "Requirements for Certificate of
Occupancy" forwarded to the Town Council. -it contains the items
required by Ordinance to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy ("C.O.")
for a project. Dick would like direction from the Design Review
Board on what they would suggest be included or not included in the
requirements for a C.O. A Town Ordinance regarding C.O.'s will
soon be written and brought before the Town Council.
After considerable discussion, the Board suggested that a conditional
temporary C.O. be issued when all health, life and safety require-
ments have been met. A final C.O. would be issued when all other
requirements, including Design Review Board requirements have been
met.
Other business: Chambertin was further discussed (see Item #3).
-5-
The minutes were approved as read.
Tom Landauer made the motion to adjourn the meeting, it was seconded
by Cheryl Dingwell and adjourned at 12:30 A.M.
* Verbatim
Respectfully submitted by
erre Sort and
Recording ecretary
Design Review Board