Loading...
PZC Packet 121592STAFF REPORT TO THE .INNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 1 Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Mr. Tony Seibert Final Design Review INTRODUCTION Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend is a 16,000 square foot duplex lot that slopes south toward the Eagle River. Design and Construction Services is proposing a duplex for this lot. The east side will be approximately 3750 square feet with the west side being 3450 square feet. The building is 3 stories with the lower level a walkout basement. Stucco and cedar sidii.g with shake shingles for roofing are the primary exterior finish and trimr rwill beheteal. The lroof form l be eistgabled he awith dthe uing se of hip forms. This Commission gave Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend a conceptual review on December 1, 1992, at that hearing the request was tabled until December 15, 1992 for final review. The only outstanding issue was a building height conflict which the applicant proposed solving by moving the structure to the north. The Commission was also concerned about the amount of paving in the project. The staff comments from the packet states that the applicant has resolved the height issue, however, on closer review of the plans, it appears that the western elevation is still in conflict with the 35 foot height limitation as measured from finished grade. The applicant has indicated that he will raise the finished grade, and enclose the bottom of the window in a timber window well. This is fine with staff on the condition that the building permit application includes a revised site plan and western elevation. The applicant has submitted revised plans which resolves the height conflict, however, not by shifting the building. The new plans reflect a change in the roof form which brings the structure into conformance with the height restriction. The revised site plan corrects an error in the original, in that the east unit's garage was shown in plan view as having two bays, not three. The corrected plan shows the garage as having three bays. The revised plan also shows the aadition of a one more .0 W-: e e r STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 2 Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Mr.. Tony Seibert Final Resign Review parking place to the east of the driveway entrance. Staff feels that this is excessive; the applicant has indicated that he will remove the added space. with the revised site plan, the building does meet all aspects of the zoning code and the architecture and building materials appear to comply with the Towr. of Avon Design guidelines. STAFF COMMENTS The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of the proposed project: 6.11 - The conformance with the Zoning Code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. COMMENT: This proposal, as modified, is in conformance with the Zoning Code and all other town of Avon rules and regulations. 6.12 - The suitability of the improvement, including type and quality of materials of which it is to be constructed and the site upon which it is to be located. COMMENT: These improvements, as proposed, are appropriate to the neighborhood. 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. COMMENT: The project appears to be well desig.ied, it preserves adjacent property's views to the Eagle River and has no apparent adverse impacts on adjacent properties. 6.14 - The compatibility of the proposed improvement with site topography. COMMENT: As submitted, the project is compatible with the site topography. r. 4 401 s STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 3 Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Mr. Tony Seibert Final Design Review 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. COMMENTS: The proposed improvements appear to be visually compatible with the neighborhood. 6.16 - The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired. COMMENTS: Staff sees no conflict with this criteria. 6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs of the Town of Avon. COMMENTS: ?his proposal is in general conformance with the adopted goa�s, policies and programs of the Town of Avon. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommendation is for approval with the following conditions: 1. That the most northeastern parking place be removed.. 2. That building permit application include a revised site plan and western elevation which reflect the addition of the window well and the adjusted finished grade. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action •1 sI 401 w aw STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 4 Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Mr. Tony Seibert Final Design Review Respe::tf�usllly submitted, Tom Allender Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions (Cl Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Date Patti Dixon, Secretary' The Commission granted final design approval for this application with the following conditions: 1. The northeastern parking space be removed. p Final Citing plans, ha aihmitted to Ctaff before WJ 18ug permit is icciiarl C7 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 1 Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Mr. Tony Seibert Final Design Raview INTRODUCTION Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend is a 16,000 square foot duplex lot that slopes south toward the Eagle River. Desigr. and Construction Services is proposing a duplex for this lot. The east side will be approximately 3750 square feet with the west side being 3450 square feet. The building is 3 stories with the lower level a walkout basement. Stucco and cedar siding with shake shingles for roofing are the primary exterior finish materials. The stucco will be white, the cedar siding grey and trim will be teal. The roof form is gabled with the use of hip forms. This Commission gave Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend a conceptual review on December 1, 1992, at that hearing the request was tabled until December 15, 1992 for final review. The only outstanding issue was a building height conflict which the applicant proposed solving by moving the structure to the north. The Commission was also concerned about the amount of paving in the project. The applicant has submitted revised plans which resolves the height conflict, however, not by shif'Cing the building. The new plans reflect a change in the roof form which brings the stricture into conformance with the height restriction. Tha, revised site plan corrects an error in the original, in that the east unit's garage was shown in plan view as having two bays, not three. The corrected plan shows the garage as having three bays. The revised plan also shows the addition of a one more parking place to the east of the driveway entrance. Staff feels that this is excessive; the applicant has indicated that he will remove the added space. With the revised site plan, the building does meet all aspects of the zoning code and the architecture and building materials appear to comply with the Town of Avon Design guidelines. STAFF COMMENTS The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of the proposed project: 6.11 - The conformance with the Zoning Code anti. other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 2 Lot 13, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Mr. Tony Seibert Final Design Review COMMENT: This proposal, as modified, is in conformance with the Zoning Code and all other town of Avon rules and regulations. 6.12 - The siitability of the improvement, including type and quality of maters-als of which it is to be constructed and the site upon which it i� to be located. COMMENT: These improvements, as proposed, are appropriate to the neighborhood. 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. COMMENT: The project appears to be well designed, it preserves adjacent property's views to the Eagle Fiver and has no apparent adverse impacts on adjacent properties. 6.14 - The compatibility of the proposed improvement with site topography. COMMENT: As submitted, the project is compatible with the site topography. 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. COMMENTS: The proposed improvements appear to be visually compatible with the neighborhood. 6.16 - The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired. COMMENTS: Staff sees no conflict with this criteria. 6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs of the Town of Avon. COMMENTS: This proposal is in general conformance with the adopted goals, policies and programs of the Town of Avon. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 1 Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Alan Aarons of Hightech Signs Sign variance and Design Review INTRODUCTION Alan Aarons of Hightech Signs, who is representing Shapiro Development, is requesting a variance from Section 15.28.080(H) of the Town of Avon Sign Code to allow +Por the placement of a 32 square foot "Development Sign" on Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. This lot is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Beaver Creek Boulevard and Avon Road. The Sign Code is specific in that a development sign is "not to exceed sixteen square feet display area". The proposed development sign would be 4 feet by 8 feet, approximately two thirds of the sign would be a 4 color rendering of the project, with the remaining one third providing leasing information, black panel with white print. The supports for the sign would be 2 - 4 x 41s, painted dark green The sign is in reference to a two story commercial project which on October 6, 1992 went through conceptual review with the Planning and Zoning Commission, no action was taken, however, the Commission response was favorable. The proposed location of the sign is directly behind the landscape wall and the recently placed sculpture on the corner. As shown on the site plan, the sign would encroach into the 10 foot required setback, this encroachment could easily be corrected by shifting the sign a few feet to the northwest. The proposed location is somewhat obscured by the wall, the sculpture and existing landscaping, however, it does provide limited exposure from both Avon Road and Beaver Creek Boulevard. An alternate location, which has been discussed with the applicant, is approximately 60 feet west of the intersection on West Beaver Creek Boulevard, across from the 1st Bank of Avon's parking lot. At this location there is a gap in the landscaping providing an unobstructed view from the Bank's parking lot and from vehicular traffic on West Beaver Creek Boulevard, but provides no exposure from Avon Road. No commitments have been made concerning this alternate location. The sign's primary orientation is to vehicular traffic, with pedestrian exposure being secondary. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 2 Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Alan Aarons of Hightech Signs Sign Variance and Design Review APPROVAL CRITER1 acting on a variance Before request, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following factors. a. The relationship of the requested variance to existing and potential uses and structures in the vicinity. COMMENT: If granted, the 32 square foot sign may detract from the recently completed landscaping on the corner of Beaver Creek Boulevard and Avon Road, otherwise, its relationship to existing and potential uses and structures does not appears to be overly objectionable. b. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity. COMMENTS: Staff does not feel relief from the uniregulation treatment amongnecessary sitesoinatheVvicinitycompatibility and formity In 1989 the Planning Commission granted a variance from the 16 square foot maximum size for a development sign and allowed one additional sign on lots 1 & 2 Sunroad Subdivision. The rational behind ::ranting the Sunroad Variance was the large size of the property, the use of part of the lot for a temporary parking lot, the double frontage of the property without continuous frontage and the vehicular orientation of the sign to and the distance from Avon Road. The variance in question is also on a lotith double frontage, although continuous, it is currently a p g lot, and the orientation is vehicular. It is not a large that nor is the distance from the streets great. It would appear the circumstances s.rrounding the Sunroad Variance and one in question are substantially different. The Denny's being constructed on Lot 2/4, Sunroad Subdivision has been displaying a non -permitted, oversized development sign, which staff is pursuing. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 3 Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek A Allan arons of Hightech Signs Sign Variance and Design Review C. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems anolicable to the requested variance. COMMENTS: Again staff would point out the potential negative visual impact a large sign may have on the recent ..mprovements to the intersection. STAFF COMMENTS FINDINGS REQUIRED: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: A. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. B That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: i. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; ii. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions alplab'!-.tothe her propertisite of the variance that do not apply generally to es in the vicinity; iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS: Staff recommends denial of the requested variance as there does not appear to be any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity, and that the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Sign Code of the Town of Avon. '." dolls 'A� STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Page 4 Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Allan Aarons of Hightech Signs Sign variance and Design Review RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Tom A'�ender Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION, �� Approved as submitted_( ) Approved with recommended conditions /(✓ Y�i Appxuved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) W' rawn ( ) Date Z \j Patti Dixon, Secretar+��' SEE ATTACHED PAGE STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION December 15, 1992 Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beavez Creek Alan Aarons of Hightech Signs Sign Variance and Design Review The Commission granted approval for the sign variance, citing the following findings and including the conditions listed below the findings: A. That the granting of the variance will not con,-.;itute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. B. That the variance is warranted for the reason that the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. Conditions: 1. The sign be located at the alternate site, on West Beaver Creek Blvd. 2. The sign remain no longer than one year, or December 1, 1993, and if the applicants need an extension, they appear before the Commission again. Kee aow t i w 4w m y Z U C6 = Q W o og an d '3 � j � V N � Cg pnju oa •r Q a Tf ti fi o$ cn :. W W 1 cad cn � U r O \ I\ Q LLL OO