The URL can be used to link to this page

PZC Packet 111594PLANNING AN- ZONING COMMISSION STAFF RL.-ORT November 15, 1994 Lot 109, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Sherman Residence Final Design Review --Fence PROJECT TYPE: Residential ZONING: PUD COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTION: Charlie Sherman has submitted an application requesting approval for the placement of a split rail fence on the west portion of his site. STAFF COMMENTS The fence is not located in any setbacks and complies with the design of fences set forth in the Rules, Regulations and Procedures. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission approve this application as presented. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Mary Holden Town Planner m RI x r� � U 1 00 I - 1. 1\ •E. \ , I:i 11\ � U 1 00 C Y\ V1 N P O J i! i U U U V n 4 O O O O NI a N Q P V O) r U V p V n °d` � i i ('�� n � N a -' \. •.11.91 � y y> ya g � P C 4 N N P O Y mu yj U Yah' U U VYI' Yv1• y V w p pn O U U .p O Y y 4 Yy 4Y. > y Y •' � N y G9. Z y> N V U a s yR i! i i x � _y. CD a o o N °d` � i i ('�� f -' \. •.11.91 � i x � _y. CD PLANNING AN ZONING COMMISSION STAFF Ie ORT November 15, 1994 Lot 109, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Sherman Residence Final Design Review --Fence PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted (✓� Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date_/S Sue Railton, Secretary The Commission approved as submitted. PLANNING AN�' LONING COMMISSION STAFF Rc�.'ORT November 15, 1994 Lot 63, Block 1, Wildridge Guida Duplex Variance - Side Yard Setback PROJECT TYPE: Duplex ZONING: PUD CGMPLIES WITH ZONING? No, Requires a Variance to Side Yard Setback This is a Public Hearing for a variance to the Side Yard Setback Requirements, on Lot 63, Block 1, Wildridge. INTRODUCTION: Mike Guida received approval on March 15, 1994, to encroach into the side and fiont yard setbacks with a retaining wall. The encroachments were: Side Yard 6' into the 10' setba:k Front Yard 22' into the 25' setback. The applicant is now requesting an additional 2' encroachment, for a total of an 8' side yard encroachment, into the side yard setback The retaining wall will be 2' off the south property line. The front yard setback encroachment is not changing. As the applicant has indicated on the application, the reason for the additional 2' is for easier access and guest vehicle parking on site. The extra area created by the moving of the retaining wall will lead to more asphalt in the front of the structure and less landscaped area. The frontage is approximately 35', and 26' of that 35' will be asphalt Is more asphalt in front of the structure acceptable to the Commission? Section 17 36 40 Approval Criteria A. The relationship of the requested variance to existing and potential uses and structures in the vicinity. Comment: A side yard setback variance was originally approved for a 6' encroachment with the retaining wall 4' from the property line. Staff is not aware of an approved variance allowing a structural wall 2' from a property line. B. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibly and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity. Comment. The relief being sought will place the wall 2' from the property line and Staff is not aware of any other variance allowing an 8' encroachment. C. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety. �1 ^ PLANNING AN., ZONING COMMISSION STAFF Ri--•ORT November 15, 1994 Lot 63, Block 1, Wildridge Guida Duplex Variance - Side Yard Setback Comment. The effect of the request will have no negative impacts on light, .air, population, transportation, traffic facilities, public facilities, utilities or public safety. D. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the requested variance. Comment. Staff has not identified any other factors for the Commission to consider. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommendation is for the Commission to consider whether the 8' encroachment is necessary and meets all the criteria set forth or if the existing variance approval for a 6' encroachment is adequate. Should the Commission decide the variance is necessary. Resolution 94-26 should be adopted. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5 Commission Review 6 Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Mary Holden Town Planner rVN 0 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE The undersigned hereby requests that a Vr,�%lANCE from the terms of the Town of Avon Municipal Code be granted. In support of this application, the undersigned state:: 1. The specific variance requested is 'O /AJ S) -DE" t pnD 2,f,'T' $ H,CJ�' t E)45T S 1UE- Z: Legal description of property: _�,E (7� -ELoCJil, 'F-DajDGE" 3. Address of property: C�1'7s�Lf F'� l -/9N>< '!Tye A-) � (:!'e. R/4 -2o 4. Owner of described property: Li 1ST) CDA — S. Applicant for variance: M I (A I 1-�'a 6. Zoning Classification of property: _JlnD=G%,L 7. Existing improvemcnts on property consist of �0 U E. The duration of the proposed variance is: Permanent Temporary Years 9. The following practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship, inconsistent with the objectives of the particular regulation would result from the strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation: SMA .vG .4/IC>9 jq,,L D ,gH'i;404 10 The following exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions aoplicable to the site do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone distr.ct: 7a T&e- - %E 4,r2-') s.ylA<L ?04W-ACZAX 104A01--.441 — 11. The strict literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of the following privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district: Mr) EA_ v -A NO JL- A) E:5 7- 0/ ///e*Ze To 4V;Z 2Jq Mon .E EI95L��rc��•!1'c55 TD 5� — is 9 A PLANNING ANu ZONING COMMISSION STAFF k. PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 63, Block 1, Wildridge Guida Duplex Variance - Side Yard Setback PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted (✓` Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date -JY't1 Sue Railtor. Secretary — Commission apgroved as submitted. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF R,?ORT November 15, 1994 Lot 87 and 88, Mountain Star Subdivision Lot Line Elimination Mountain Star PUD Amendment PROJECT TYPE: PUD Amendment --Lot Line Elimination ZONING: PUD This is a Public Hearing for a PUD Amendment of Mountain Stir Subdivision for the elimination of a common lot line, thereby, creating one lot. PROPOSED PUD REVISIONS Willis J. Wright, Jr., on behalf of Mountain Star Limited Liability Co., has submitted an application for a PUD amendment for the elimination of a common lot line between lots 87 and 88 The elimination will create one lot and reduce the number of lots for Mountain Star PUD. H [STORY: Mountain Star PUD received approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 2, 1992, for 88 single family lots with one care taker unit for each lot. In March of 1994, Mountain Star PUG was amended to add an additional six single family lots with a care taker unit on each lot. The existing Mountain Star PUD allows for a total of 94 single family Lets STAFF COMMENTS The Mountain Star PUD is being amended to allow for 93 single family lots through the elimination of a common lot line between 87 and 88. Design criteria for approval of a PUD or amendment is listed below. I . Conformity with the Avon Comprehensive plan goals and objectives, 2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, the sub -area design recommendations and the design guidelines adopted by the town, 3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, build, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation, 4. Uses, activity, and density which provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationsnip with surrounding uses and activity, 5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and /or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed, 6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional devilment responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community, PLANNING AN� ZONING COMMISSION STAFF R�?ORT November 15, 1944 Lot 87 and 88, Mountain Star Subdivision Lot Line Elimination Mountain Star PUD Amendment 7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off- site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town Transportation plans, 8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural feature, recreation, views and function; 9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, hmctional 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 relving upon completion of future project phases, 10 Adequacy of nublic services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection; ll. That the existing streets and roads are suitable an adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission adopt Resolution 94-28, which contains the findings Findings: I The PUD is consistent with the development patterns and locations set forth in the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan 2 The PUD is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives related to land use and proximity to the town core, 3 The Pt I) is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives related to the environment, 4 The PCD is consistent with the Transportation Plan traffic generation forecast for this property. RECOMMENDED ACTION I Introduce Application 2 Applicant Presentation 3 Open Public Hearing 4 Close Public Hearing 5 Commission Review 6. Commission � ,:tion It APPLICATION FOR REZONING The undersigned hereby requests that a REZJRING be granted in accordance with the terms of the Town of Avon Municipal Code. In support of this application, the ur.dersigned states: 1. The Rezoning requested is: PUD Amendment 2. Le,131 description of DrOperty: Lots 87 5 88 - Mountain Star Subdivision 3. address of property is 0777 Wildwood Road 4. Owner of described property; )fountain Star Limited Liability Co. 'Oolicant for Rezoning: Same as above Zoning Classificstion of prooer-f: Pun ).=YiSting imj)rcve:Hents on prcrerty consist of Vacant 3. Duration of proposed 2ezoning. Permanent s Temporary ^Years 9. There is hereby attached a list of the names and aJdresses of all property cwners "'.hin 300 feet of the property icon which the Rezoning is requested, and the recuired notices for m:ilino and posting. 10. Aeciticnal cosraents: i d" ^9rebv'_ l ify ChdL the above st2t2nent5 are true and cert c t— a-knowled - e and the appli�a.�on cement o that fact. I am the owner of the above desc n bed riled to act as agent for the owner. MOUNTA,V STAR LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY BY; W Coma as Puthorized agent I SAME A Pplicant llis J. Wright, Jr., Gen. Ptr. -loner 1000 S. Frontage Road W., 6201 crrei; S Phone '4u-cr — '— tddre:. and ?hGnr Yumrer — Vail, CO 81657 (303) 476-9230 9/30/94 ��yy nn a ter,—'--------3� �C.� � F�� 1J ------ OCT 17 1994 COMMLINII'i OEvtLOPMENT TuTr.L r-.ui PLANNING ANu ZONING COMMISSION STAFF kr PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 87 and 88, Mountain Star Subdivision Lot Line Elimination Mountain Star PUD Amendment Respectfully Submitted Mary Holden Town Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted N/) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date 4�eO �s/q94 Sue Railton, Secretary Commission approved as submitted with the following findings, and conditions: Findings: 1. The FUD is consistent with the eve opment patterns and locations set forth in the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, 2. The PUD is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives related to land use and proximity to the town core, 3. The PUD is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives relented to the environment, 4. The PUD is consistent with the Transportation Plan traffic generation forecast for this property. Conditions: 1. The existing Mountain Star Subdivis;on Pud Development Plan and Standards still apply. (% A Planning and Zwaing Commission Staff Report November 15, 1994 Semi -Mobile Vehicle Repair Shop Special Review Use Lot 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek PROJECT TYPE: Special Review Use -Public Hearing ZONING: IC COMPLIES WITH ZONING? Upon Approval of SRU This is a Public Hearing for a Special Review Use to allow for a semi-mobile vehicle repair shop on Lot 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. INTRODUCTION Paul Bennicoff has submitted an application requesting approval of a Special Review Use to operate a semi-mobile vehicle repair shop at the Vail -Avory Commercial Park. The space would be approximately 900 square feet. STAFF COMMENTS This project received a variance from the parking requirements during the review process and the approved parking plan does not allow for a use that requires more than I parking space per 800 square feet. Approval of this Special Review Use will increase the parking demand on the site and increase the potential for a parking problem for the site. Following are the criteria, as listed in Section 17.48.040, to consider for approval of a special review use: A. Whether the proposed use otherv:ise complies with all requirements imposed by the zoning code, COMMENT: It appears the parking regulations may not be met with regards to the Special Review Use. B Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the town comprehensive plan, COMMENT: The proposed use does meet the intent of some of the Comprehens;ve Plan goals. C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses Such compatibility may be expressed in appearance, architectural scale and features, site design, and the control of any adverse impacts including noise, dust, odor, lighting, traffic, safety, etc Planning and Z. ging Commission Staff Report November 15, 1994 Semi -Mobile Vehicle Repair Shop Special Review Use Lot 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek COMMENT: This is a compatible use, however, the impacts of the use may not be compatible with the site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and "Zoning Commission deny this a;iolication by adoption Resolution 94-29, which contains the findings for denial. RECOMMENDED ACTION I Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Respectfully Submitted, 1/-0 C-"" cr Mary Holden Town Planner APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL REVIEW USE The undersigned hereby requests that a SPECIAL REVIEW USE be granted in accordance with the terms of the Town of Avon Municipal Code. In support of this application, the undersigned states: 1. The Special Review Use requested is: To Use small Jtprj unit of industrial/ commercial complex as home base of semi-mobile vehicle repair shop. 2. Legal description of priperry: Unit #2SC, Lot 14/15, Block 1, Beanchmark at Beaver Creek Sub. ,aka Vail -Avon Commerr_-,al Park) 3. Address of property is 0391 Metcalf Road 4. Owner of described property: Paul D. Bennicoff (Contract Purchaser) 5. Applicant for Special Review Use same 6. Zoning classification of property: INCx�SnLnu- '--u"^- rtacIaL. (zG) 7. Existing improvements on property consist of: Structure under construction 8. Duration of proposed Special Review Use is: Permanent y Temporary Years 9. Thtre is hereby attached a list of the names and addresses of all property owners within 30U feet of the property upon which the Special Use permit is.requested, and the required notices for mailing and posting. 10 Additional comments: Other than the office set aside for self—storage use, it is expected that this will be the smallest unit in the entire structure. Baobably in the 800-900 sq.ft. range. I do hereby certify that the above statements are true and correct and the application is signed as an acknowledgement of that fact. I am the owner of the above described property or authorized to act as agent for the owner. Applicant Owne• 1885 Buffehr Creek Rd, Vail, CO 81620 Address & Phone Number ress one Number Dated 10/06/94 Dated 40 1 t 40 1 y \� N JJ • 2�9 9 N 9 4t, i,` sN \'\ \ top lop N0 Za9 N00 S 0 �P ASPHALT LCE m Se ♦S � 2S� 9N Ci 2 \8 ZS8 2S8 ING SPACES ARE LCE .LSP ,LSP ZSP 31 9 1�1 � Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report November 15, 1994 Semi -Mobile Vehicle Repair Shop Special Review Use Lot 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approve,' as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continues? (4 Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date !S /q9(& _Sue Railton, Secretary— i The Commission mntinn d1 to tahla tf� -- Planning and Zomag Commission Staff Report November 15, 1994 Home Occupation Special Review Use Lot 98, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision PROJECT YPE: Special Review Use -Public Hearing ZONING: PUD COMPLIES WITH ZONING' Upon Approval of SRU This is a Public Hearing for a Special Review Use to allow for an in home occupation on Lot 98, Block :, Wildridge Subdivision. INTRODUCTION Virginia Laiming and Andre Willner have submitted a Special Review Use application to aliow for the operation of an in home occupation. The in home occupation is called "Quality Pet Care Services". The application, attached, does not specify what activity will be conducted in the residence. The public notification states the telephone wil! be utilized, however, no other activity is indicated. STAFF COMMENTS The Zoning Code defines a home occupation as an occupation, profession, activity or use that is conducted within a dwelling unit which. A Is clearly incidental and subordinate to the use of the dwelling unit as a residence; B Does not alter the exterior of the property or affect the residential character of the neighborhood, and C Does not require or allow employees to work on the property Following are the criteria, as listed in Section 17.48.040, to consider for approval of a special review use. A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed by the zoning code, B Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the town comprehensive plan, C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses Such compatibility may be expressed in appearance, architectural scale and features, site design, and the control of any adverse impacts including noise, dust, odor, lighting, traffic, safety, etc. Planning and Zontag Commission Staff Report November 15, 1994 Home Occupation Special Review Use Lot 98, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission to approve Resolution 94-27, which contains the findings for approval. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation I Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Respectfully Submitted, /r i 101r� Mary Holden Town Planner APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL REVIEW USE The undersigned hereby requests that a SPECIAL REVIEW USE be granted in accordance with the terms of the Town of Avon Municipal Code. In support of this application, the undersigned states: I. The Special Review Use requested is: 2 3 4 Legal description of property: — Lo i—1 IR E=— 112- S LLL I V, 1.51 0 h/ Address of property is: A330 O 1 I ► a1 L OCA Owner rf described property: 5. Applicant for Special Review Use: o--- Lal_►k( 6. Zoning classification of property: -e\J4oLL- — 4�6.k 'EX_ 7. Existing improvements on property consist of: -� 8. Duration of proposed Special Review Use is: Permanent __X 'emporary _ Years 9. There is hereby attached a list of the names and addresses of all property owners within 300 feet of the property upon which the Special Use permit is requested, and the required notices for mail ing and posting. 10. Additional comments: I do hereby certify that the above statements are true and correct and the application is signed as an acknowledgement of that fact. I am the owner of th above described property or au` o ized to act as a ,for the owner. Appl a Owner �o Address one Number dress a one Number Dated Datea a ArA1 " Planning and Zowng Commission Staff Report November 15, 1994 Home Occupation Special Review Use Lot 98, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted (✓) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date //0-0 /S /Sue Railton, Secretary The Commission approved as submitted with the following findings and conditions: Findinqs: The proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements B. The proposed use is consistent with the objectives and purposes of the comprehensive plan; and C. The proposed use is designed to be compatible with the surrounding land uses and uses in the area. Conditions: and subordiante to the use of the dwelling unit as a residence. 2. The home occupation may not alter the exterior of the property of affected the residential character of the neighborhood. 3. Employees are not allowed to work on the property. 4. Clients are not allowed at the home occupation. 5. Domestic animals associated with the business are not allowed on Lot 98, Block 1, Wildridge. 6. This home occupation is permitted for the applicants only and does not run with the land. 04 PLANNING ANas ZONING COMMISSION STAFF k '.iRT November 15, 1994 Tract N, Block 3. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation District Bldg. Re -Roof Final Design Review -Roof Material Change PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued (✓' Denied ( ) Withdrawn(//) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date _15 '40 /gJlY Sue Railton, Secretary_ /✓"� �� '�" The Commission withdrew the application at the request of the applicant.. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION STAFF Re BORT November 15, 1994 Tract N, Block 3, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation District Bldg. Re -Roof Final Design Review -Roof Material Change PROJECT TYPE: Sanitation Building ZONING: GPEH COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTION: Upper Eagle Valley Sanitation is -equesting a roof material change on half of their building. The existing material on the building is half cedar shake shingle and half metal roof The request is to make the entire roof metal. The metal will be etcheu galvanized. STAFF COMMENTS: The Commission tabled this item at the October 18, 1994 meeting so that a representative would bring a sample of the roof •nater ial. A representative of the Sanitation District will be present at the meeting with a sample. In order to reduce glare, the proposed metal is etched galvanized Further, the architectural style of the building lends itself to a metal roof. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission approves this application with the following condition The existing and new metal roof have an etched or acid wash treatment to reduce glare RECOMMENDED ACTION: I Introduce Application 2 Applicant Presentation 3 Commission Review 4 Commission Action Respectfully submitted, 1 � Mar; Holden Town Planner PLANNING ANU)LONING COMMISSION STAFF Rte RT November 15.1994 Lot A, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Lodge at Avon Center Final Design Review -Site Modification PROJECT TYPE: Mixed Use ZONING: TC COMPLIES WITH Z.ONING9 Yes INTRODUCTION Bob Roman, on behalf of the Home Owners Association, is requesting removal of the stairs leading from the western parking areas to the structure. This area would be landscaped with sod. Currently they are in disrepair. STAFF COMMENTS 'The Design Rules, Regulations and Procedures state in Section 6.22. 1. Sidewalks I Sidewalks or walkways should be provided as necessary for efficient pedestrian circulation within the project and with neighboring properties, 2 Walkway locations should be separated from vehicular traffic where possible; 3. Walkways should be constructed of attractive durable materials such as decorative concrete or brick pavers; 4 Walkway widths should be compatible with anticipated uses Required minimum walkway widths will be at the discretion of the Planning and "Zoning Commission. The removal of the stairway would not promote efficient pedestrian circulation on the, site Pedestrian movement would be mixed with the vehicular movement, which is discouraged STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission deny this request based on non-conformance with Section 6.22 1 Sidewalks of the Design Rules, Regulations and Procedures RECOMMENDED ACTIO"i: 1 Introduce Application 2 Applicant Presentation 3 Commission Review 4. Commission Action I I PLANNING AN ZONING COMMISSION STAFF k, PORT November 15,19;14 Lot A, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Lodge at Avon Center Final Design Review -Site Modification Respectfully Submitted Mary Holden Town Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) i Date � 9� Sue Railton, Secretary_ 14 4 &_1_z I PLANNING Ah ZONING COMMISSION STAFF R, PORT November 15, 19104 Lot 22, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Intermountain Engineering Final Design Review- Site Modifications PROJECT TYPE: Office ZONING: IC COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTION: Jeff Spanel has submitted an apphca,4)n requesting approval for the placement of "Tuff Shed" on the southwestern portion of the site. The shed would be located 7.5' from the side yard property line. STAFF COMMENTS: In 1983, approval of a Special Review Use was given for an outdoor storage area for Franzen Construction. The SRU was valid until June 30, 1985, due to concern over negative impact on future, adjacent development. There appears to be no negative impact from the placement of the tuff shed. Accessory buildings are allowed in every zone district subject to the following criteria: "A. An accessory building is defined as a subordinate building, the use of which is customarily incidental to that of the principal building or to principal use of the land and which is locate on the sane lot or parcel with the principal building or use. Accessory buildings shall not be provided with kitchen or bath facilities sufficient to render them suitable for permanent residential occupancy. Approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission and a building permit is required." The Design 2ules, Regulations and Pro;edures state, "Temporary structures including excavated basements, construction storage and office trailers, and tents shall not be allowed except as may be detennined to be ne.essary during construction." The Zoning Code defines a building as "any permanent structure built for the shelter or enclosure of persons, animals, chattels, or property of any kind, and does not include advertising signboards or fences." STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Stat; recommends the Commission approve the application with the following condition: 1. A landscape plan accompany the shed placement, to be approved by Staff 2. The stied be painted to match the main structure. �gj Im V O �g n 'u (,097 OVOY / 37VDI 3W I w1 N TUFF SHED, INC. 201 Rio Grande Blvd. Denver CO. 80223 (66) Denver, CC e Colorado Springs, CO • Salt Lake City, UT • Sacrarnento, CA e Phoenix, AZ L Las Vegas, N'✓ • Albuquerque. AIM e San Jose, CA. t v Santa Fe 0 i Ifalamath CO 161. 6taP�e i FFF a Osage cr- m N coC;)o «_ O m , N i 7 �Z 1 n I 1n r Q �rt g y 00 SXR+ o g o c U') A o v v `9wo 5 aov 'O ww .5 O d�� a J U N N O u7 C Jy 5 pp g p Y� a a X X q X O O w O d O a N N y Q y r o -4 '�° V a t v Santa Fe 0 i Ifalamath CO 161. 6taP�e i FFF a Osage cr- m N coC;)o «_ O m , N i 7 �Z 0 Q "d O N rgVy C 0 E> �o adc 0 3 0 U z x0 a4) I N Lo oO L, � O N C` N OoOO Lo C` O NL C, E` to � r O 0 t' P a WNto M � M O M P C N LO O �.� F Gq 40% M M d' 'a0 N C` toC13 W Cn` O• Cri` O o O n to oO o` to o O N 0'. o 0 C` N O to N M o O t� o G to N V orio O > O lot N N N M M M o �' O O to N to N to N to N to N O to O O to N O to to L` O O 0 Ll to to N N U) r` to N O O to N to El 0. p, O 0. V 'O r` c0 P m P O N M �-• N to '0 O '0 O v t0 �--' C' � C4 N N N M o ... m :0 c0 O N O N C' 'O O N d' �O O N X m zo k O X C' k Co X N CO % Dp tJ y ,O '0 .O -0 co M W m M O X O k O X O O N N N N N N 2 y 0.> 4 5 PLANNING Ai`:., ZONING COMMISSION STAFF R. PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 22, Block it, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Intermountain Engineering Final Design Review - Site Modifications 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3 Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Mary Holden Town Planner RECOMMENDED ACTION: PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions (_/� Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action 1 1 �/ / Date /.rK. � 9r� _Sue Railton, Secretary1�x� The Commission a proved the reuest withtfte followin conditions: 1. the shed be all one color including the trim, 2. a landscape plan accompany the shed placement, to be approved by staff, 3. The shed be painted to match the main structure PLANNING AN p ZONING COMMISSION STAFF K. PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Golden Eagle Service Center Final Design Review - Site Modifications PROJECT TYPE: Automobile Service Center ZONING: NC COMPiAES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTION: Ron Bifani has submitted an application requesting approval fix the conversion, of the two proposed wash bays on the south end into service bays. STAFF COMMENTS: Golden Eagle Service Center received approval of a Special Review Use on April 20, 1993, to operate a service center. The approval allowed the use, with no size limitations on the service center. The applicant is requesting approval to eliminate the automatic wash bays and construct them as service bays. The exterior of the two additional bays will be the same as originally approved, with the exception of overhead doors being added. The doors, materials and color will match the existing structure. The existing site plan, with the conversion of the wash bays, complies with the parking regulations. However, the applicant has shown additional parking. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the following conditions, should Comrr ission approve the application: I. All the parking must be striped. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3 Commission Review 4. Commission Action FT H L CL :- Gi LJ I �.^ 'a r- Z i O - o < Z • J I `r d <i FT H L CL :- Gi LJ I iil LL r- w FT H L CL :- Gi 0 G X G r 1 ri Irrl�(r� Ir r —F rr f f rf I. 1 , I x lul d - 0 ! I JJJ J IJ JJJJJJJ-JJJJJJ- JJ JJJJJ I C^ J. !� C O O Q - — — l:.` -J-J J IJJ J J ;J J IJ' . r J LJJJJ JJ r_ J - 'Jy�_�JJJJJJJJ_JJJJJJJJ- � lig-=- JJJJJ � JJ JJ `l ►- I -_-- J JJJJJ J'JJJJJ Q --- - JJJJ�JJ JJJJ J jJ 1 �I J�JJJJJJJJJJJJJ - ,r -{^1� t IJ ;JJJJJ IJ J.J I. J 06, r" 1 PLANNIFIG AN.. ZONING COMMISSION STAFF ]%. PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Golden Eagle Service Center Final Design Review - Site Modifications Respectfully submitted, -4/111 aC't Mary Holden Town Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions (✓S Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date./S '/teJ Sue Railton, Secretary 'IeIC4 lee The Commission approved with the following condition: 1. the parking lot be striped. PLANNING A. _ ZONING COMMISSION STAFF R! PORT November 15, 1 Lot 24, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Ray -Canton *Juplea Final Design Review - Temporary Fuel Tank Storage PROJECT TYPE: Residential ZONING: PUD COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTION: Buz Reynolds Jr. has submitted an application requesting approval for placement of a 300 gallon diesel fuel tank for 6 months on Lot 24, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision. STAFF COMMENTS: The Design Review Rules, Regulations and Procedures stipulates, in Section 6.24, D. l., "Oil, gasoline or liquid petroleum gas tanks will not normally be permitted on or aboveground. Temporary installations for a period not exceeding 2 years may be approved provided the installation complies with all applicable regulations and is fully screened from view form all public right-of-ways and neighboring properties." The applicant must comply with all applicable Fire Codes and receive Fire Department approval for the placement of the tank The type of screening has not been indicated other than a 16" earth darn. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend the Commission deny this request based on non-conformance with the Design Review Procedures, Rules and Regulations. RECOMMENDED ACTION: I Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission .Action Respectfully submitted, /�'� t f Mary Holder Town Planner PLANNING Aj,4.j ZONING COMMISSION STAFF I%t;PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 24, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Ray -Canton Duplex Final Design Review - Temporary Fuel Tank Storage PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions. ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued (✓j Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date /54 _Sue Railton, Secretary iJ'L /!!%� The Commission tabled request for a new site location. PLANNING A ZONING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ORT November 15, 1994 Lot 44, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Reynolds Residence Final Design Review - Site Modifications PROJECT TYPE: Residential ZONING PUD COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTI7N: Buz Reynclds Jr. has submitted an application requesting appro,al for the placement of fill on the south side of his basketball court and the addition of a oaroecue area in the back yard of his residence. The barbecue will bE just west of the existing basketball court. STAFF COMMENTS: The area will be approximately 15' by 20' and contain a bench of stones. The fill on the south side of the basketball court is to allow a more level area imme,liately adjacent to the court, instead of a sharp slope. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation is for approval with the following condition: 1. The disturbed area be revegetated with native grasses and bushes. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2 Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully sr.omitted, Mary Holden ds*A � PI ANNING AN ZONING COMMISSION STAFF k. PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 44, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Reyn3lds Residence Final Design Review - Site Modifications Town, Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted (✓� Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date Sue Railton, '.cretary _ The Commission approved with the following ndi ti,nn- _ 1. gine disturbed area be revegetated with native grasses PLANNING Al llw ZONING COMMISSION STAt, K—PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 97, Block t, Wildridge Subdivision Romanelli Duplex Condition of Approval -- Landscape Plan PROJECT TYPE: Duplex Landscape Plan Approval ZONING: PUD COMPLIES WITH ZONING? YES INTRODUCTIGN: Peter Rcmanelli has submiited a revised landscape plan, satisfying one condition of his Final Design Review Approval, dated May 17, 1994. The plan is attached. STAFF COMMENTS The Ponderosa Pines must be a minimum of 6-8' and not the 4-6' as indicated. The shrubs must be a minimum of 5 gallons. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the application with the following condition: The Ponderosa Pines and the Rock Spirea meet the Town of Avon minimum size standards, which are 6-8' for deciduous trees and 5 gallons for shrubs. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully su.imitted, Mary Holden Town Planner e PLANT L... 1 5 I Com'( -f. E!�o'T 35, ART �C --b��I k l ST �D1zM To �E PETE�MIN'�p IN PIN To Ade 1�P�TA� - 6f��JTI-F>✓ PINS "W t-�4v- lA AMf !V CATIA - WAX LOW i�- (z11�5 Cf,-F-r--uM - w C15tC1�Pt1a'!' jt-UM5 UCID��l1S - UOUt-'�El� PPS At�T�iAPkt�C LOS UVA -U IZ; �1 - t�-lt�1N � ►�iNN IC�K- �-LbW�'t� 1GAL. t5l A -rRIpEN'Tl+.TA 131 G wf-15rTr-fK14 506E bay — r�-T. #5 G��CoG4RPUS NbNTANUs I G -M "OUNTp(N MARC6wl f I Hot.UV15GUS DUMOSDS Rcx.K S P I RE AC I po-f5oC A%r-taus M oNO&YN US N(Wt,-- D .tom PINUS POSiDE FpNGERG� �'IN1� R t tis C��UM Wpx GUt��ttz- QU�US �LLGIO�I:� #5 141, mm 45. SAA.tz-it�lEl� l..A�NDs�.�`4P� �i�-G�-11T>��fzF_ 1900 19�+ �,Goy:Fr<, C-0 gc �lC) Zia Q W t: J J W Z Q C O cc w 0 J DATE:.:. CO U O cc I,. - Cl) n odoa yal 0— 70 -� ti U , � I 1 1 1 1 i d I I I / 11 ri c i I 1 I I I n 1 I i 1 I I 4 I 1 1 I 1 , i 1 , 1 I 1 n I 1 � t 1 1 y� 3 hh I I I "B"Coe SHONDINI `.7NINNV-1'd gunioD1IHOHb O ec e« eoc MIOD 'TVA 06401, IXAI Mao isoa cl S ! L r 0 w 0In LI IJ lnl yw O 1 M (� ,� rc ry a o rco a o a a o u In mo G vl � r� Q r G r O Y OV �+ Ory ON O N O =� 0 O 1 it 1rl +�#r '1ti iti LT' z r F Eq 1 � z q ll I LI u n if, J � w � J � o 0 I y It l --; i • � .. -��• = :::anis :e5:�; �r �: �,� CC�i :::ani vee M� �� . -=� .: �. _ .,-. �� 1 . � ;. ,� ;.� _ - , . _ � .. - _ � - PLANNING ANu ZONING COMMISSION STAFF R. PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 97, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Romanelli Duplex Condition of Approval -- Landscape Plan ]PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions (v4 Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) Date ls'eleo t J¢ Sue Railton, Secretary The Commission approved the revised landszape plan and denied the metal roof request. PLANNING Ai, A) ZONING COMMISSION STAFFi.LPORT November 15, 1994 Lot 56, Block 2, Benchmark Vail Bank Final De-agn Review -Sign Program PROJECT TYPE: Commercial -Master Sign Program ZONING: Town Center COMPLIES WITH "ZONING? Yes INTRODUCTION Larry Ast, on behalf of Vail Bank, has submitted an application for approval of the Vail Bat.k Center Master Sign Program, The Master Sign Program will contain approximately 3'6.73 square feet of signage, which includes building identification and tenant signs. REQUEST: Please refer to the attached information. STAFF COMMENTS The application indicates second floor signage which is discouraged in the sign code and was not allowed on the Slifer, Smith and Frampton building. However, second floor signs were recently approved for the Century 21 brilding. The Commission should determine whether second floor signs will be allowed i.t the future, so a consistent policy may be established. GUIDELINES AND REVIEW CRITERIA Section 15.28.060 Sign Design Guidelines A Harmonious with Town Scale. Sign location, configuration, design, materials, and colors should be harmonious with the existing signs on the structure, with the reighhorhood, and with the townscape B Harmonious with Building Scale the sign should be harmonious with the building state, and should not visually dominate the structure to which is belongs or call undue attention to itself C Materials Qualitv sign materials, including anodized metal, routed or sandblasted wood, such as rough cedar or redwood, interior -lit, individual Plexiglas -faced letters; or three dimensional individual letters with or without indirect lighting, are encouraged Sign materials, such as printed plywood, interior -lit box -type plastic, and paper or vinyl stick -on window sigsts are discouraged, but may be approver!, however, if' determined appropriate to the location, at the sole discretion of the Commission. PLANNING Ai-, J ZONING COMMISSION STAFFA.'�PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 56, Block 2, Benchmark Vail Bank Final Design Review -Sign Pr,rgram D. Architectural Harr.iony. The sign and its supporting structure should be in harmony architecturally, and in harmony in color with the surrounding structures. E. Landscaping. Landscaping is required for all free-standing signs, and should be designed to enhance the signage and surrounding building landscaping. F. Reflective Surfaces. Reflective surfaces are not allowed. G. Lighting. Lighting should be of no greater wattage tf..n is necessary to make the sign visible at night, and should not reflect unnecessarily onto adjacent properties. Lighting sources, except neon tubing, should not be directly visible to passing pedestrians or vehicles, and should be concealed in such a manner that direct light does not shine in a disturbing manner. H. Location. On multi -story buildings, individual business signs shall generally be limited to the ground level. Section 1528.070 - Sign Design Review Criteria In addition to the sign Design Guidelines listed above, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall also consider the following criteria while reviewing proposed sign designs. A. The suitability of the improvement, including materials with which the sign is to be constructed and the site upon which it is to be located: B fhe nature of adjacent and neighboring improvements C The quality of the materials to be utilized in any proposed improvement 1) The visual impact of any proposed improvement as viewed from any adjacent or neighboring property. E The objective that no improvement will be so similar or dissimilar to other signs in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic , will be impaired F Whether the type, height, size, and/or quantity of signs generally complies with the sign code and appear to be appropriate for the project G Whether the sign is primarily oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic, and whether the sign is appropriate for the determined orientation PLANNING At,J ZON/NC COMMISSION STAFF PORT November 15, 1994 Lot 56, Block 2, Benchmark Vail Bank Final Design Review -Sign Program STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Commission determine if second floor signs will be permitted. If not, Staff recommends the sign program be approved with the following condition: 1. Second floor signs are not allowed. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commie »n Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully Submitted - Mar} Holden Town Planner e. d 0 ' ---1 I -TSIGIS DATE: November 1, 1994 TO: Mary Holden Town of Avon /Planning Dept. FROM: Larry Ast u - RE: Vail Ban Center lvlastei Sign Program ................................................................................................................................. I ................................. Enclosed you will find the Master Sign Program for the Vail Bank Center building ide... ion prog am and the tenant sign program. The building identification signs are internally illuminat ;d with reverse pan channel letters and a logo that will be reverse ;pan channel backlighting combined with the veins of the snowflake glowing after dark. Tenant signs will be nonilluminated metal letters and logos flush mounted to the building in the locations shown. Please call with questions. HIGHTECHSIGNS PO Box1688 Production Center VaiI.0081658 910Notnngharn Road 303 949 4565 Surto S 2 FAX 9494670 Avon. C081620 Aspen 6 Glenwood Sprigs 303 945 6695 Am COMPREHENSIVE SIGNAGE PROGRAM VAIL BANK CENTER OFFICE/ COMMERCIAL BUILDING AVON,COLORADO NOVEMBER, 1994 A. BUILDING IDENTIFICATION Tower - Description: The tower will have two faces with logo and two lines of text, as shown in exhibits 1-A, 1-B, l -D & 1-E. One tower face will have only two lines of text, as shown in exhibit I -B. Material: Text shall be reverse pan channel letters, with white neon reflecting on the wall. Logo shall be a cabinet sign with white translucent plex for the `lines" of logo, and opaque remainder of the sign face. Colors: Hartford green face and sides, similar to PMS 553. East Face - Description: One line of text reading "VAIL BANK CENTER", as .-hown in exhibits 1-C and 2-A Material: Same as above Colors: Same as above 0 PANTONE 553C =1 2. TENANT SIGNAGE Primary tenant: Two entryways, shown in exhibit 3-A, shall be permitted with metal text and logo, non -illuminated, painted Hartford Green, (PMS 553C). Window signs will be permitted as per the Town of Avon sign code, for the first level only. Other tenants: Description: The landlord shall have the right the allocate amongst the tenants, the right to use the signfaces shown in exhibits 4-A thru 4-C. Laadlord approval shall be required on all signage. Exhibit 4-E summarizes the sizes and locations of the secondary tenant signs. Tenants may have one line of text being maximum of 10" in height, and a secondary line with a maximum height of 6" copy. The p. ,maty line shall be the name of the tenant, and the smaller copy will be the nature of the business. Logos may be used with a maximum height of 20". The nature of the business and the logo cannot exceed 40% of the square footage allowed. Typestyles are open to tenant selection. See exhibit 4-D. Materials: All text and logos shall be a minimum of 1/4" metal letters, stud mounted flush with the building. There shall be no illumination of the tenant signface. 2 A Colors: All text shall be painted Hartford Green, similar to PMS 553C. Logos may be colored with corporate colors, subject to the approval of the landlord. Window lettering: No window lettering or signs shall be permitted. Temporary signage: No temporary signage will be permitted. All signage will require approval of the Town of Avon. All workmanship and specifications will comply with all applicable government regulations. The cost of obtaining permits, approvals and drawings will be that of the tenant. 3 a =v a✓IG S SIGN DRAWING P.O. BOX 26.88 . VAIL, CO 81 658 . 303.949.4565 . FAX: 303.949.4670 To- F, FA,G JOB #__`.__/�_ DATE CLIENT ��,,IIyIAIL �A%L SCALE 8PHONE A!E F CONTACT Z�/ Di AW FAX HIM > 11, 10- _ E m E 7 10.- ■ 0. 14 =� s =s SIGNS JLMSMMOM.. SIGN DRAWING P.O. BOX 2688 . VAIL, CO 81 658 . 303.949.4565 . FAX: 303.949.4670 e� �7— ZL F VAIs. /2 X BANK CENTER JOB # _— DATE.1l�7y':"BY�L.__ ,Qft�y;� �iCiliT L CLIENT-1 SCALE 2iA_ PHONE c,AN/8�T CONTACT - - - FAX 40 Go =SIGNS SIGN DRAWING P.O. BOX 2688 . VAIL, CO 81658. 303.949.4565. FAX: 303.949.4670 /l� ti7ig /tics j' w sov 70,01wcs71 E/-BaiIT/0.✓s UAIL BANK ' 9 7Q h 3.3 94 -5 JOB # _ _ DATE. '_'' BY/ _ _ A/E CLIENT v /L lam_ �i�!/r,12 CONTACT—. �1 SCALE. PHONE FAX 1 Lei N O El Aa ` L �_ =-T H"SIGNS SIGN DRAWING P.O. BOX 2688 . VAIL, CO 81 658 . 303.949.4565 . FAX: 303.949.4670 EtAj)' C - s of C/t/AN"% 1, 11141 E Zo„ I� � ihePrudantial ni Gore Rar'9iPropedies,„c. „v ZJ v CUAUULc, �FAST EDDIES PAWN /0"/ FOR THE BEST PRICES IN TOWN � SDEWEY CHEATEM S HOWE& i YOUR HONEST, HARD FIGHTING LAWYER 6 JOB#_ DATE IE/'14—VBY/VE�LL'�—— _— — CLIENT 11411L- [JANk E,�YF2 _ CONTACT 4i -73' 110�✓ SCALE—__ _ PHONE FAX: --- — a C1 VAIL BANK CENTER TENANT SIGN PROGRAM NOVEMBER, 1994 Secondary tenant signage will be permitted in locations summarized below, and shown on Exhibits 1-C, 1-D, and 1-E. Desi nation Size Exhibit T-1 20" X 12' 1-D 9 z-' T-2 20" X 12' 1-D T-3 20" X 12' 1-E T4 20" X 12' 1-E T-5 20" X 12' 1-E > i H L 1 T-6 20" X 12' 1-C T-7 20" X 12" 1-C / _r 04% +ft PLANNING A:..) ZONING COMMISSION STAFF t.EPORT November 15, 1994 Lot 56, Block 2, Benchmark Vail Bank Final Design Review -Sign Program PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved w,th modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Conceptual, No Action ( ) i Date /.SX * Sue Railton, Secretary_ The Commission approved the request by a 4 to 3 vote.