Loading...
PZC Packet 061692STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 3, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Suncrest Condominiums Building Color Change Request Design Review INTRODUCTION Randy Perry, on behalf of the Suncrest Condominium Association, is requesting design review approval to change the color of the fourplex building on lot 3, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision. The new colors being proposed for the building are as follows: Building Material Color 1"x8" cedar siding - Devoe 2M45E Tan Tone Stucco (including chimneys) - Devoe 2H8P Cloversweet White Doors - Devoe 1D28C Derby Green Door trim - Devoe 1D28C Derby Green 3rd floor deck rails - Devoe 1D28C Derby Green All of the above listed colors will be applied as an exterior latex paint. Color chips of each of the paint colors will be presented at the meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and discussion of proposed building color change request. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Presentation of Application 2. Applicant's Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 2 Lot 3, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Suncrest Condominiums Building Color Change Request Design Review Respectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION V Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions (� Continued (n) Denied ( ) Withdrawn Date \� Patti Dixon, Secretary^ r The Commission approved the color change with the stucco being an Eggshell Devoe #200 The garage doors and siding being a an Tone Devoe #2M45E, and the trim being a Derby Green Devoe #1D28C. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Holy Cross Electric Association Line Relocation Special Review Use Amendment Public Hearing INTRODUCTION In May of 1987 the Town Council approved a Special Review Use request from Holy Cross Electric. The request and approval allowed Holy Cross to upgrade the existing 69KV line to a 115KV transmission line. The existing 69KV line leaves tl:e Metcalf Road Substation and traverses a ridge just north of I-70. At this point there are several highly visible towers. The line then runs east through the Town limits and beyond, eventually turning south and dropping into the Eagle -Vail Substation. The 1987 approval for upgrade to 115KV maintained the existing alignment. This ungrade was never executed. Holy Cross is now requesting a slightly different alignment out of the Metcalf Road Substation to run a 115KV line. The existing 69KV line would be moved to the new alignment. Although the new alignment does represent a visual improvement in comparison to the existing 69KV line, the Staff does have some concerns about this project. In the 1987 approval, the 69KV line was to be removed. The current request will have the 69KV line unde-hanging from the 115KV line from Metcalf Road to Buck Creek. At Buck Creek the 69KV line will drop underground and run down Buck Creek to the Pizza Hut area, along Swift Gulch Road, then north up Swift Gulch to the existing alingment. At that point it will come aboveground and continue on its present alignment to the Eagle -Vail Substation. The new 115KV line will continue across Buck Creek and through to the Town limits. It then angles north and eventually connects to the Vail Substation on Red Sandstone Road. The Staff has raised several concerns and issues with this proposal, and with the existing lines through Town. The Town Staff would like to take this opportunity to work with Holy Cross to consider consolidation of some of the power lines that run into and out of the Metcalf Road Substation. At present there are 5 separate lines which connect with this Substation. these lines create a tremendous amount of visual clutter and unsightlyness in this high traffic area. The Staff believes there should be a consolidation of these lines, ultimately allowing the removal of the power lines and towers which run up either side of Metcalf Road. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 4 Holy Cross Electric Association Line Relocation Special Review Use Amendment Public Hearing The Staff also questions the necessity of retaining the existing 69KV line. This line creates a poor visual image through Avon and through the valley floor all the way to Eagle -Vail. Representatives of the Wildwood/Mountain Star property have raised concerns with the new 115KV line crossing their property at Buck Creek and would like to investigate alternatives, including possible burial of the 'line. An additional concern of the Staff is the proposed undergrounding of the existing 69KV line at Buck Creek. No information has been submitted regarding exact alignment or availability of easements. STAFF COMMENTS The following criteria as listed in Section 17.48.040 of the Avon Zoning Code, should be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission when reviewing a Special Review Use application. A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed by the Zoning Code; COMMENT: There are no other conflicts with the Zoning Code related to this proposal. B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive Plan; COMMENT: Page 1.2 of the Comprehensive Plan contains Avon's visior. statement. The second paragraph of the vision statement reads "IMprovement of the visual appearance of the Town and development of a high quality urban design image". The importance of this statement cannot be over emphazised. The Comprehensive Plan refers over and over to the importance of a positive visual appearance of the Town and its neighborhoods. There is an opportunity here to address the most prominent negative visual element related to Metcalf Road and the Wildridge Subdivision, however, the information provided to date does not allow us to adequately define or evaluate those possibilities. As presented, Staff feels very strongly that this proposal STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 4 Holy Cross Electric Association Line Relocation Special Review Use Amendment Public hearing does not conform to the goals and direction of the Avon 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. COMMENT: As proposed, the Staff does not feel that an additional power line across Avon is compatible with adjacent uses. We believe that there are some options and opportunities which have been raised which have not been adequately addressed by this proposal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff believes that there are issues related to this request that deserve to be addressed. Although the new alignment requested does present a better visual appearance than the existing alignment, the Staff can not recommend approval without a better understanding of the issues that have been raised. The Staff recomemntlation for this proposal is for tabling. This would allow the Staff and applicant to further discuss and understand options and alternatives. Tabling the request would also allow representatives of Wildwood/Mountain Star to investigate alternatives for the Buck Creek Crossing. If the Planning and Zoning Commission chooses to act upon this application at this time, the Staff feels that we have no alternative but to list the issues as conditions of approval. These conditions are: 1. The two existing 115KV lines that lead into the Metcalf Substation be consolidated into one alignment and that alignment would be the lower 115KV approach. 2. That the two 115KV lines leaving the Substation, the existing and proposed lines, follow the newly proposed alignment out of the Metcalf Road Substation and through to the Town of Avon boundary. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 4 of 4 Holy Cross Electric Association Line Relocation Special Review Use Amendment Public Hearing 3. That the 115KV lines extending north from the Metcalf Road Substation be removed. 4. That the 69KV line be removed. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commisaion Action Respectfully submitted, Rick Pylman Director of Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn Date Patti Dixon, Secretary "i STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Lyon Trucks, Inc. Contractor's Yard and Soil Storage Special Review Use Public Hearing INTRODUCTION Lyon Trucks, Inc. is requesting a Special Review Use to allow outside storage on Lots 14 and 15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Lots 14 and 15 are zoned Industrial Commercial and outside storage is allowed as a Spec=al Review Use. The use would consist of storage for six commercial vehicles, including front end loaders and dump trucks, an office trailer and storage of up to 500 yards of soil. An area between the storage use and Metcalf Road would be bermed to screen visibility of the site. The applicant does not anticipate dust to be a problem, but will take appropriate action if it becomes necessary, such as utilizing tarps or watering the soil. STAFF COMMENTS The following criteria as listed in Section 17.48.040 of the Avon Zoning Code, should be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission when reviewing a Special Review Use application. A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed by the Zoning Code; COMMENT: The proposed use is in compliance with all other applicable zoning regulations. B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive Plan; COMMENT: The Metcalf road subarea description identifies existing problems as insufficient landscaping and screening for existing industrial and storage uses and defines this as undesirable. New development in this area should include architectural and landscape screening of storage areas. Goal #I-1 states "Ensure that a high quality visual image of STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION „'une 16, 1992 Page 2 of 3 Lots 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Lyon Trucks, Inc. Contractor's Yard and Soil Storage Special Review Use Public Hearing the Town is established through both public and private sector activities". Objective "E" of that goal states "Improve the appearance and image of the service district along Nottingham and Matcalf Roads through enhanced design, screening of activities and landscaping". As the Pn'.rance to the Wildridge Subdivision, the appearance and character of the Industrial/Commercial District are extremely important. The intention of the IC District is to provide sites for light industrial and manufacturing uses, wholesale outlets, and warehousing, offices and storage facilities. The Staff believes that outside storage of heavy equioment and soil is not an appropriate use for this zone dist ict, and is not consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan or the IC Zone District. 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. COMMENT: Staff does not believe this request is compatible with adjacent uses. The majority of the IC District has developed as office and warehouse/showroom uses and displays a lighter industrial character than that of a contractor's yard and soil storage facility. The staff is very concerned about dust and stormwater runoff as well as the visual impacts upon the adjacent properties and upon the traveling public. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommendation is for denial of this request. We believe this use represents a diversion away from the development pattern of the IC District and will create a negative visual impact upon the District. Additional concerns of Staff are dust and stormwater runoff. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 3 Lots 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Lyon Trucks, Inc. Contractor's Yard and Soil Storage Special Review Use Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, lll Rick Pylman Director of Community Development PLANNING AND `ONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions( /) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continue Denied ( ) Withdrawn Pa ( ) Date \ V� tti Dixon, Secretary The Commission tabled this item to allow the applicant more time to respond to the concerns regarding screening, dust control, etc. • 1 • Fear. Rosen & Travers 11,00 1: ,,. K \T r, _r ..i_.r 2(") T!. .R :'�I �'if)P 17Q.Thlo 4331rE R. alcor R,c6arJ P. Rosa : une 9, 1992 Ric6on� �. Tn.rr< Town of Avon P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 Attn. Mr. Rick Pylman RE: Lyon Trucks, Inc. Dear Mr. Pylman: This letter is designed to outline to you the operations to be conducted by Lyon Trucks, Inc. on Lots 14 and 15, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, for which a special review use application has been filed. The following operations are planned: 1. The storage of six commercial vehicles, including front-end loaders and dump trucks. 2. The storage of soil, on a temporary basis only, on those occasions that sufficient storage is not available at a particular job site. Such storage shall not at any one time exceed 500 yards of soil and is expected to average far less than this quantity. 3. The company expects to maintain a trailer on the site as an office. In addition, in response to specific concerns raised by you, please note the following: 1. The area of the lots abutting Metcalf Road will be bermed as depicted on the plans prepared by Intermountain Engineering and deliverE:d previously to you. This is expected to provide sufficient screening from view of these operations from Metcalf Road. 2. Dust is not anticipated to be a problem because the type of soil to be stored is of a heavy, rocky nature. If high winds bacome a problem, however, the company is willing to take appropriate action, including the use of tarps to contain the soil or wetting the soil to reduce dust. 't—, P Te ,r., ' C ..,.. .., ..i.. r.., ., P.0 F rylman Jk 9, 1992 P._ J- Two 3. We want to stress to the Town that the proposed uses of the site are on a small-scale basis. The plans submitted show that only a small percentage of the land is usable for the above-described purposes. In addition, soil will be stored only when necessary and for as short a time as is needed. Please call me if anything further ?s needed or if you wish to discuss this application in greater detail. �yeA77xruly yo , Richard D. Travers RDT/skg /ltri 41 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot _45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duplex Front Yard Setback Variance Request Public Hearing INTRODUCTION Brian Vedder is requesting a variance to allow for a fifteen (15) foot building encroachment into the required twenty five (25) foot front yard setback on Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision. The building encroachment involves the garages on both sides of the duplex. Lot 45 is 0.99 of an acre (43,124 sq. ft.) in size. The ..nits themselves are approximately 2,650 and 2,100 sq. ft. in size, not including garages. The applicant has stated that the variance is necessary to provide reasonable access to the garage without excessive elevation differentials. Also, the original subdivision guidelines provide for up to 15' front yard setback variances when a property has an average slope of 20% - 30%. Mr. Vedder has indicated that his lot has an average slope of 26%. STAFF COMMENTS Before acting on a variance application, the Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: SECTION 17.36.40 Approval Criteria A. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity; STAFF RESPONSE: Lot 44 to the west has a building under construction at the present time. This building was designed in a manner that allowed all portions of the building to be outside of the 25' setback Brea. Lots 46 to the east and 48 to the north are vacant. Staff does not feel that the garage encroachment will hate a significant negative effect on the future homeowners of these lots or on the character of Wildridge a.r a whole. B. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcements of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the obiectives of this title without grant of special privilege; STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 4 Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duplex Front Yard Setback Variance Request Public Hearing STAFF RESPONSE: as mentioned previously, the building being constructed on lot 44 to the west is meeting all of it's setback requirements. Since lot 45 is not significantly steeper than lot 44 it would not appear that relief from the strict enforcement of the setback requirement is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity. C. Tha effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety; STAFF RESPONSE: There would not appear to be any negative effects upon the items listed in the above criteria. SECTION 17.36.50 Findings P_eClLired The Commission shall make the following written findings before granting a variance; A. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties classified in the same district; B. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; C. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: 1. The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title, STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 4 Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duplex Front Yard Setback Variance Request Public Hearing 2. There are e,<ceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone, 3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties 4n the same district. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommendation is for denial of the variance request as presented. Staff feels that granting the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistant with the limitations of other properties classified in the same district. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; That the variance is not warranted for any of the following reasons: 1. The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title, 2. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone, 3. 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 same district. A resolution documenting the Commission's decision and findings regarding this variance request will be presented at. the July 7, 1992, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONINC COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 4 of 4 Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duplex Front Yard Setback Variance Request Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Re pectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied (� Withdrawn Dateti Dixon, Secretary The Commission denied the request for a front yard setback variance, citing the following findings: A That the granting of the variance would constitute a grant of special Privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties classified in the same district. -- m STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Vedder Duplex • Front Yard Setback Variance Request Public Hearing B. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety; or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, — C. The variance is not warranted for the following reasons: 1. The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; and 2. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duplex Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTI0N Brian Vedder is requesting conceptual design review of a proposed duplex building on Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision. Lot 45 is .43 of an acre (43,124 square feet) in size and is located on Wildridge Road East. The Vedder duplex units will be accessed via asphalt driveways which approach the houses from the northwest and northeast at a grade of approximately 8-1GA. A conceptual landscape/grading/site plan has been submitted for the commissions review. The proposed two and one half story building is approximately 4,750 square feet in size, not including the garages. The maximum building height, at 40', exceeds the maximum allowable. There is a gas Fireplace located in each unit. Exterior building materials are as follows: CementitioUS tile shingles (dull finish) 1" x 6" T&G cedar siding (25% of wall area) - Stucco (75% of wall area) Cladded wood windows Stucco deck pilasters STAFF COMMENTS Since this is a conceptual design review applica,•ion no formal action will be taken at this time. However, Staff would offer the following comments: - The proposed building height should be adjusted so ti�at it does not exceed 35' above existing or finished grade. - Those portions of the concrete driveway thresholds and lanterns located in the utility easements will need review and approval from all utility companies prior to the issua-ce of a building permit. STAFF REPORT TO THR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 2 Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision VEuder Duplex conceptual Design Review RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted, (�.z4Z Jim Curnutte Planner STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 67, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Brennand Residence Final Design Review INTRODUCTION James L. Brennand is requesting fi.al design review of his proposed single family residence on Lot 67, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. Lot 67 is .51 of an acre (22,216 square feet) in size and is located on Wildridge Road East. The Brennand residence received conceptual design review on June 2, 1992. The Planning and Zoning Commission offered the following comments at the meeting: - The north and west elevations could use more windows, if not, do something with the siding to improve the appearance. - Add more landscaping around the house. - Fit the house into the natural topography rather than grade a flat bench to set the house on. - The massing of the upper level of the house seems awkward, see if it can be improved. - Increase the driveway width to atleast 14'. The Brennand residence will be accessed via a 14' wide asphalt driveway which approaches the house from the northeast at approximately 5%. A conceptual landscape/grading/site plan has been submitted for the commissions review. The proposed two story residence is approximately 2,150 square feet in size, not including the two car garage. Maximum building height is 26'. There is a gas fireplace located in the living room of this home and a deck located at grade along the south side of the building. Exterior building materials are as follows: - Timberline Ultra asphalt shingles (slate blend) - 1" x 6" cedar siding (stained white birch) - Stucco located at the chimney only (white) - 1" x 4" & 1" x 10" cedar facia (white) - Cedar plywood soffits (white) - Clad casement windows (white) - Wood deck STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 4 Lot 67, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Brennand Residence Final Design Review STAFF COMMENTS The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of a proposed project: 6.11 - The conformance with the Zoning Code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. COMMENT: This proposal is in conformance with the Avon Zoning Code and other applicable rules and regulations of the town, with the exception that the slope along the northeast part of the driveway exceeds the maximum allowable for an unretained wall. 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: The type and quality of both the building and landscape materials are suitable with town guidelines. 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. COMMENT: The siting and landscaping of the building is sympathetic to the adjacent residential property. All grading will be contained within lot lines. The applicant has made a number of changes to the building in responce to the commissions comments at the conceptual review meeting. 6.14 - The ccmpatibility of the proposed improvement with site topography. COMMENT: The applicant has amended his elevation drawings to fit the house in better with the existing topography of the lot. This revised grading scheme however has not been reflected on the site plan. 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 4 Lot 67, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Brennand Residence Final Design Review COMMENT: Landscape clusters have been provided throughout the property and all disturbed areas will be revegetated with transplanted material from the site and seeded with a high altitude grass and wildflower seed mix. 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. COMMENT: 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. COMMENT: The proposal appears to be substantially in conformance with the adopted goals, policies and programs of the Town of Avon, with the exceptions previously noted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this final design application with the following conditions: 1. The grading/drainage/landscape plan must be amended to reflect the slope along the sides of the house and reduce the slope along the northeast cc•ner of the driveway. 2. Issuance of a building permit will be subject to town engineer review and approval of amended grading/drainage/landscape plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action .f 4W C i STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 4 of 4 Lot 67, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Brennand Residence Final Design Review Respectfu lly submitted, Jim Curnutte Town Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Ci Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn Date Patti Dixon, Secretary The Commission granted final design approval witn the condition that the grading/drainage/ landscape plan be amended to reflect the slope along the sides of the house and reduce the slope along the northeast corner of the driveway, and that the new plan be subject to approval by the uwn Staff when The when tie a�licant applies for a building Permit. #I M a STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 38-A, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Maroney Residence Material Change Request Design Review INTRODUCTION The Maroney residence located on Lot 38-A, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision received conceptual design review approval on August 6, 1991. One of the five comments made by the Commission at the time was that "the exposed foundation walls must be covered with some type of finish material and stucco is suggested." On August 20, 1991, Final Design review approval was granted for the residence. The approved building materials were: 10" round log siding Stucco on all exposed concrete Woodruf shingles Aluminum windows On Octoher 15, 1991, the Maroney's received design review approval to change their roof material from woodruf to asphalt shingles (Timberline). Pat and Gayle Maroney are now proposing a change to the approved material on the exposed concrete areas of the house from the stucco to paint. A sample of the proposed paint color will be presented at the meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and discussion of proposed material change request. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 3 Lot 38-A, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Marony Residence Material Change Request Design Review RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Presentation of Application 2. Applicant's Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Appr)ved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continuipda ( ) Denied ( ) Withdr n Date Patti Dixon, Secretary Thg Commi sion denied the request to substitute painting of the exposed foundation walls for the approved stucco finish, requiring the applicant to complete the project with the approved colors and textures. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING, AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 70, Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision Bristol Pines Townhomes Material Change Request Design Review INTRODUCTION On March 19, 1991, Mountain Coast Homes, Inc. received Final Design Review and Fractionalization approval for the 14 unit Bristol Pines Townhouse project; on lot 70, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. The project consists of two buildings containing six and eight units respectively. The eightplex building will house 4 two bedroom units and 4 three bedroom units. The sixplex building will be comprised of 4 two bedroom units and 2 three bedroom units. The residential portion of the buildings are located on the upper three levels with one car garages, a mechanical room and some storage space located on the lower leve:. All of the units include a gas fireplace. The staff report presented to the Design Review Board on March 19, 1991, specifies the following exterior building materials: - Redwood and stucco siding - Cedar shingles - Aluminum clad windows - Metal deck railings - Spherical pendant lights During the meeting one of the Commission members asked the applicants representitive, Mark Donaldson, if redwood siding is really going to be used on the building. Mr. Donaldson stated that since the applicant was considering a solid body stain for the siding he did'nt want to commit to redwood but stated that it would be some type of wood siding. In early May Mountain Coast Homes Inc. submitted a building permit application for construction of the project. During staff review of the construction drawings it became apparent that a number of changes from the original design review approvals were being proposed ( fenestration, siding, removal of pendant lights, etc.). Staff feels comfortable approving the proposed changes on a staff level with the exception of the following: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 3 Lot 70, Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision Bristol Pines Townhomes katerial Change Request Dasign Review - Change from cedar shingles to asphalt shingles. The applicant could like to use the 360 Lb, per square Timberline shingle. The color will be weathered wood. - Change from natural board siding to masonite siding. Mr. Donaldson has indicated to staft that when he told the Commission on March 19, 1991, that he wanted to leave the siding type open he thought that included masonite. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Review and discussion of proposed material change request. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Presentation of Application 2. Applicant's Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte Planner M a STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 3 Lot 70, Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision Bristol Pines Townhomes Material Change Request Design Review PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions Continued (,,)-Denied ( ) Withdrawn,( Date ( Patti Dixon, Secretary The Commission tabled this item to the Jul. 7th i.eeting, to allow the applicant toime to provide written agreement for the reguested changes from the adjacent homeowners at Beacon Hill, since the changes from the original approval are considerable. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lots 2 and 4, Sunroad Subdivision Denny's Restaurant and Commercial Building Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Jim Morter, of Morter Architects, on behalt of Kevin Killham, has requested conceptual design review of a proposed Denny's restaurant and attached commercial building on Lots 2 and 4. Sunroad Subdivision. Lots 2 and 4 are 0.503 (21,910 sq. ft.) and 0.581 (25,308 sq. ft.) of an acre, respectively, and are zoned Town Center (TC). If the applicants proposed development plan receives final design approval. they will close on the property and vacate the common lot line between Lots 2 and 4 to form one lot. The proposed restaurant and commercial building are allowed uses in the TC Zone District. The proposed development consists of a one story restaurant (open 24 hours) with a floor area of approximately 5,100 sq. ft. and a one story commercial building with a floor area of approximately 2,500 sq. ft. The owners of the property do not intend to build the commercial portion of the project at this time. They would, however, like to proceed through the design review process and obtain all of their required approvals for the entire project. An alternate north elevation drawing of the building has been provided, which shows how that wall will look until the commercial portion is added. Assuming that the commercial building will be used for retail purposes and considering the size of the restaurant dining area, the minimum parking requirement for the project is approximately 41 spaces. The site plan shows 52 parking spaces on the property, including 4 handicap spaces. When these spaces are combined with the other impervious materials on the property (buildings, sidewalks, driveways, etc.) the total area of impervious surfaces on the property is approximately 36,117 sq. ft., which is 77% of the site. This figure is slightly under the 80% maximum impervious coverage allowed in the TC Zone District. The large amount of impervious surfaces on the lot appears to be a result of the applicant's desire to provide excess parking spaces and a driveway that loops around the building. All trash storage associated with the restaurant will be contained within the loading area and therefore completely out of public view. No specifics have been provided for the commercial building trash storage. Proposed building materials are as follows: - The roof of the buildings will be covered with a balast material. Mechanical equipment on the roof will be screened via stucco covered walls. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 3 Lots 2 and 4, Sunroad Subdivision Denny's Restaurant and Commercial Building Conceptual Design Review - The buildings walls will be covered with stucco and split faced concrete block. - Windows and doors will be alumimum. - SIGNS - There will be three signs on the restaurant. These signs will be 2' x 14' (28 sq. ft.) and will be located on the north, east, and west walls of the restaurant. The signs will be individual letters with metal returns and yellow plexiglass faces. The signs will be internally illuminated. No signage is presently shown for the commercial area, however, the applicant has indicated that it will most likely be individual, plexiglass faced, internally illuminated letters. A monument sign is proposed to be located at the southeast corner of the property. The sign is 8' high and will include only the Denny's name (no reference to the retail shops). The sign will be an interior -lit, yellow plastic faced, box sign with a metal border. The sign will be supported on a stone pedestal. STAFF COMMENTS As this is a conceptual review, no formal action will be taken at this time. However, Staff has the following comments: - Staff feels that it is a good idea to review an entire project up front, even though it may be built in phases over time. We do, however, have some concerns with the phasing plan of this particular development. - It may be possible to use the area under the commercial building to satisfy parking requirements. This would allow a larger landscape buffer around the perimeter of the property. - Additional windows should be added to the north elevation of the building. - More detailed information of proposed signing should be submitted at the final design stage (especially for the commercial building). - A model of the proposed building and lot should be presented at the final design stage. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 3 Lots 2 and 4, Sunroad Subdivision Denny's Restaurant and Commercial building Conceptual Design Review - More specific information should be provided regarding trash storage for the commercial building. - The applicant should consider reducing the overall amount of impervious surface on the property (reduce number of parking spaces). - The landscape plan should be coordinated with the existing plans for landscaping Avon road as well as the post office property to the west. The landscape plan should specify all proposed plant materials by name and size. Since this property is at a prominent location in Town and surrounded on three siot-s by roadways, a rather extensive and mature landscape treat%ment is suggested. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte Planner STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 53, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Pardee Residence Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Larry and Kris Pardee are requesting conceptual design review of their single family home proposed for Lot 53, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision. Lot 53 is 0.72 of an acre in size and is located on the upper portion of Beartrap Road. The proposed building is two stories high, however, a substantial portion of the lower level is below grade. The maximum building height above finished grade is 25'. A two car garage is located on the lower level of the house and incorporated into the building's overall design. The living area of the residence is approximately 3,000 square feet, including the unfinished basement, but not the garage. A large deck (12' x 52') is located along the rear of the house. Exterior building materials include logs, stucco, river rock, vertical cedar siding, 1" x 6" trim, asphalt shingles, wood doors and wood windows. The driveway will'be finished with asphalt. No grading and drainage or landscape plans have been provided with this application. The applicants have indicated that they have people lined up to do the landscape and grading plans, but are more interested in hearing the Commission's comments about the building's proposed architecture and materials at this time. STAFF COMMENTS As this is a conceptual review, no formal action will be taken at this time. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 1E, 1992 Page 2 of 2 Lot 53, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Pardee Residence Conceptual Design Review RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation S. Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte P1 anner STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 95, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Gossett Duplex Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Dave Gossett, with Marcal Construction. Inc., has submitted a conceptual design review application for a duplex on Lot 95, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision. Lot 95 is 0.45 of an acre (19,602 sq. ft.) in size and is located on Old Trail Road. The property slopes toward the west at approximately 17%. The proposed building is 2-1/2 stories high, however, a substantial portion of the lower level is below grade. The maximum building height is approximately 28'. A two car garage and mechanical/storage space is located at the lower level of both units. The living area in each unit is approximately 2,000 square feet. The applicant has not decided whether he will install a gas or woodburning fireplace. All driveway and parking areas will be asphalt. Proposed building colors will be discussed at the meeting. Exterior building materials include the following: - Timberline asphalt shingles (slate color) - 1 x 8 channel rustic cedar siding - Stucco - Rough sawn cedar fascia - Metal clad wood windows - Wood decks with peeled aspen log railings - Copper on chimney caps and possibly bay window roof A very conceptual landscape and grading plan has been submitted for the Commission's review. STAFF COMMENTS As this is a conceptual review, no formal action will be !F taken at this time. However, Staff has the followi*jo� comments: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Lot 95, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Gossett Duplex Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Dave Gossett, with Marcal Construction. Inc., has submitted a conceptual design review application for a duplex on Lot 95, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision. Lot 95 is 0.45 of an acre (19,602 sq. ft.) in size and is located on Old Trail Road. The property slopes toward the west at approximately 17%. The propos3d building is 2-1/2 stories high, however, a substantial portion of the lower level is below grade. The maximum building height is approximately 28' A two car garage and mechanical/storage space is located at the lower level of both units. The living area in each unit is approximately 2,000 square feet. The applicant has not decided whether he will install a gas or woodburning fireplace. All driveway and parking areas will be asphalt. Proposed building colors will be discussed at the meeting. Exterior building materials include the following: - Timberline asphalt shingles (slate color) - 1 x 8 channel rustic cedar siding - Stucco - Rough sawn cedar fascia - Metal clad wood windows - Wood decks with peeled aspen log railings - Copper on chimney caps and possibly bay window roof A very conceptual landscape and grading plan has been submitted for the Commission's review. STAFF COMMENTS As this is a conceptual review, no formal action will be taken at this time. However, Staff has the following comments: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND 'ZONING COMMISSION June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 2 Lot 95, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Gossett Duplex Conceptual Design Review - The overall amount of landscaping on the lot appears to be very minimul. Showing native vegetation at all areas arond the house and driveway seems unrealistic. - The building elevaticrn drawings submitted for final design review should be at least 1/4 scale. The grading/drainage plan needs a lot more work. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted, Jim Curnutte Planner