Loading...
PZC Minutes 042192RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ;BANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on April 21, 1992, at 7:30 PM in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Rd., Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Perkins. Members Present: John Perkins, Buz Reynolds, Patti Dixon, Sue Railton, Henry Vest, Jack Hunn Staff Present: Jim Curnutte, Town Planner; Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development; CharletLe Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary Chairman Perkins stated that all members were present, except for Clayton McRory, Henry Vest, and Jack Hunn. Jack Hunn arrived at 7:31 and Henry Vest at 7:34. Lot 1. Lodge at Avon Subdiv_isi_o.n, Avon Townesquare, Request for Extension of Design Review _A_pprovai Jim Curnutte stated that the approval granted to the Avon Towne Square a couple years ago is due to expire in a few weeks. The applicant is requesting the maximum allowed extension of one year. Considerable discussion followed on the number of unanswered concerns the Commission had at the previous approval. The Commission decided it would feel more comfortable about an extension if the applicant would return and review some of these concerns. Buz Reynolds moved to table this item until the May 5, 1992 meeting. Henry Vest seconded and the motion carried with John Perkins voting nay. 11-1 eoob. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 Page 2 of 12 Lot 58, Block 3. Wildridge Subdiv_ision, Jones_Res.i_dence, Final Design Review Buz Reynolds stepped down as a voting member of the Commission due to a conflict of interest. Jim Curnutte stated that Bill and Esther Jones are requesting final design review of a single family residence. He stated that this lot is one of the most northern lots in the Wildridge SL":)d i v i s i on. Half of the lot is covered with a platted non -buildable area. The remaining developable portion of the lot is about an a:re in size. Where the proposed residence is to be located, the grade is about 20%. Staff feels that the landscape plan is very conceptual in nature. The applicant received final design approval for a single family residence on May 21, 1991. It was much larger than this proposal and required more driveway area and more cut and fill. etc. Due to the construction costs the applicants decided to redesign and relocate the house. The Commission reviewed this house conceptually on February 4, 1992. The Commission had three comments at that time, which were: 1. The applicant review the detailing on the dormer; 2. The applicant review the roof lines as they connect into the garage element; and 3. The applicant provide a more detailted landscaping plan. Curnutte stated that the building is two stories high and has gable roofs. It is about 2500 square feet. Exterior building materials are rustic channel cedar siding, cedar door and window trim, 6 panel wood doors, wood clad windows and asphalt shingles, the Heritage 30 Tamko product. The chimney cap and all exposed foundation walls will be painted to match the building. There is a railroad tie retaining wall and planter area. The drawings show gutters and downspouts on part of the garage, but the drawings do not show a complete plan. The driveway will be finished with asphalt. The applicant has brought in color samples for the Commission's review. Curnutte stated that the proposal is in conformance with the zoning code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town. He then reviewed the criteria for considering a final design review stating that all grading will be contained on the lot, and the building should not negatively impact solar and view corridors of neighboring properties, the proposed building appears to be compatible with site topography. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: The driveway entrance must conform to town standards; 2. A revised grading plan be provided. Curnutte stated that this item had been provided just prior to the meeting. 3. Staff suggests that a new landscape plan be provided prior to the issuance of a building PLANNING AND ZONING April 21: 1992 Page 3 of 12 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 58, Block 3. Wildridge Subdivision_ Jones_ Residence. Final Design Review (cont) oermit. Bill Jones sta;-.ed that the body of the house will be natural cedar color and the trim will be a green and will be on the fascia only. He provided samples. He stated that the color of the roofing material would be rustic redwoo,J. He stated that they are trying to keep the landscaping as natu al as possible. Most of it will be rye grass. There will be the least amount of excavation as possible. Most of the landscaping will be in the driveway area to the walkway and up to the patio area. The want to keep the trees at a minimum. Considerable discussion followed on the landscaping plan, the method of irrigation, which the applicant stated would be by hand at this time. An irrigation system will probably be installed at a later date. The applicant stated that the chimney was for looks, since the fireplaces will be gas. Discussion followed on the use of asphalt shingles and the color chosen. Discussion followed on the roof line. Discussion followed on the boulder retaining wall. Sue Railton moved to grant final design approval to Lot 58, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision with the condition that a revised landscape plan showing more detail on the landscape and more detail regarding the boulder retaining wall be provided for St ff approval. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried with Jack Hunn voting nay. Buz Reynolds resumed his seat as a voting member of the Commission Lot 70, Block 2. Benchmark at__Beaver --- _Creek _Subdi_v_ision_ Avon Medical Center. Sian_Pro_ram and Variance_ Request Sue Railton stepped down as a voting member of the Commission alie to a conflict of interest. Jim Curnutte stated that Alan Aarons of Hightech Signs, representing the Avon Medical Center, is requesting approval of a new sign program for this building. The program involves three signs. One to be mounted on the building, on the east wall; a freestanding monument sign on the south side; and an exit only, small monument sign at the exit driveway of the project. The building identification sign will have individual cast aluminum letters. The upper case letters will be about 14" high PLANNING AND 7.ONING April 21, 1992 Page 4 of 12 Medical Cen COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES and the lower case letters will be 4" high. The letters will be in a baked on white enamel finish, mounted directly onto the wall and will be flush with the brick of the wall. They will be indirectly illuminated with spotiights shining up on the sign. The medical center logo will be mounted next to the letters. The total square footage is about 39 square feet in size. For an individual business, signage is based on building frontage on the road. This building has about 75-1/2 lineal feet of frontage, therefore is allowed about 75-1/2 square feet of signage. The monument sign is 4 ft. x 6 ft. or 24 square feet in size. It is intended to be located at the southern end of the lot. The sign would sit on top of a 3 ft. x 6 ft. brick pedestal. The bricks would match the building. The sign will feature a bronze finish cabinet over a white lexan "solar" face. Because of the bronze cabinet, only the letters will show. The sign will be internally illuminated. Total height is about 7-1/2 feet. The applicant has requested a variance in order to place this sign 3' from the front property line. The variance will be discussed separately. The exit only sign is a sign that has been there about 10 years. There is a small pedestal at the driveway entrance. The applicants want this to be a one way situation. They would like to put a one by three sign on top of the pedestal. This sign would match the monument sign. This is also located within three feet of the property line and will need a variance approval. Curnutte stated that the Commission should review the guidelines for approving a sign program, which are provided in the staff report. Buz Reynolds asked about the amount of building frontage of this building. Curnutte stated that the definition of a building front is that side of the building that most closely parallels the front lot line. Curnutte then reviewed the design criteria for considering a sign program. He reviewed the signs on the neigli5oring buildings. Staff recommends approval of the sign program with the exception of the location of the freestanding mon!jment sign. Jim Curnutte stated that, regarding the variance requesi„ two variances are requested. One for the monument :- gn and one for the exit only sign. The requirement for any frdestanding sign is that it ba at least 10 feet back from the property line. The PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 Page 5 of 12 Lot 70, Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver CreekSubdivision,— -Avon. Medical Center, Sign Program and Variance Request, (cont) applicant is asking for a 7 foot relief of that requirement. His stated reason for this request is that if he complied with the requirement, it would require considerable removal of the landszaping. It would be a shame to lose a significant portion of the landscaping. The exit only sign has been there for a considerable time, and there are utilities in place. For convenience sake it would be good to utilize that pedestal, also for safety purposes. If moved back within the 10 foot regulation, visiility would not be as good and problems of people trying to drive in that entrance could occur. Curnutte then reviewed the approval criteria, stating that the exit only sign appears to be acceptable. However, the monument sign would negatively affect an existing drainage swale and possibly impair future road improvements planned for Beaver Creek Place. He stated that the plans are not finalized at this time for the improvements, therefore, Staff would not like to have a sign approved within three feet of a property line at this time because of this. He stated that the applicant's request to place the exit only sign back on the existing pedestal seems reasonable, however, Staff feels that the other monument sign request is excessive. Staff recommends approval of the requested variance for the exit only sign. Staff recommends denial of the requested variance for the southern monument sign, as Staff feels that granting the variance would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistant with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. Alan A,;ons stated that while this is a business location, it is hardly a location that should be equated with a Wal-Mart or the Annex. It is a medical facility and it is the only business that will be conducted in this building. It is important to have the signage as explicit and visible as possible. The reasons given for the location of the sign are pretty accurate. The landscaping has been in place for over 10 years and is quite extensive. To move the sign within the 10 feet from the property line, it would be blocked by the landscaping. Additionaly, in front of the sign in the easement area, there is a ditch. Landscaping, similar to what is already there is planned to go around the new brick foundation. Mr. Aarons stated that one item that was not discussed in the sign PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 Page 6 of 12 er__ Creeksubdivision,_ Avon program is a request for a temporary banner until the time that the permanent signs can be delivered, approximately four to six weeks. It would simply say "Avon Medical Center" or The Future Home of Avon Medical Center". It would be a white banner with either black or blue letters. Considerable discussion followed on the proposed location of the monument sign, possible other locations, the requested temporary banner, and possible future improvements to the road. It was the general consensus of the Commission that the applicant could probably find another location for the monument sign. The applicant stated that he would be willing to take a look for other alternatives, but felt that this proposed location is actually the best solution. Jack Hunn moved to grant approval to the sign program as presented, with the condition that the monument sign be moved to a location where a variance would not be required. Patti Dixon seconded. Jack Hunn amended his motion to include the temporary nanner, which can be installed as soon as a TCO is issued, and wi;l be removed as soon as the permanent sign is installed, or a maximum time of two months. Patti Dixon seconded the amendment. The motion carried unanimously. Jack Nunn moved to grant a variance, specifically for the exit only sign, and denial of the variance for the monument sign, citing the findings that the granting of the variance would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity; and the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would not result in a pratical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Sue Railton returned as a voting member of the Commission. Lots 2-12._F bend Subdivision., Eaglebend Clubhouse, Final Desmon Review Jim Curnutte stated that Jeff Spanel and Russ Thrasher were present to discuss the proposed clubhouse at Eaglebend Apartments. He raviewed the comments made by the Commission at the conceptual design review on April 7, 1992, as follows: - The applicant should look at the sidewalk on the east side and soe if it could be removed from the public right-of-way. This has PLANNING AND ZONING April 21, 1992 Page 7 of 12 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lots 2-12, Filing 4 Eaglebe_n_dSubdiyis_ion_,___Eaglebend__Cl_ubho_use,. Final Design Review, (cont) been done. - The parking spaces must meet the Town's minimum size standards. - The boiler flue should be painted to match the building. - The fence around the children's play area should be stepped down rather than sloped and siding should be provided o,, both sides of the fence. This has been accomplished. - Put lots of landscaping in front of the fence. This has also, been accomplished. - Clean up the area on the west where the posts are sticking up. This has also been taken care of. Curnutte stated that Staff does have a couple concerns regarding some improvements still in the right-of-way. The landscaping in front of the fence is in the right-of-way, and Staff would like to get approval from the Town Engineer and Public Works Department. Also, the final plat should be recorded for this property. The south side parking spaces still do not meet Town standards of 18' in length, plus 24 feet of back up space. Jeff Spanel stated that they are investigating the possibility of eliminating the ramp and the sidewalk around the back of the building, by putting a handicap lift inside the building. If this will meet the requirements, it will eliminate a lot of the grading that has to be done behind the building and allow them to put windows on the ground floor behind the building. Mr. Spanel also asked that rather than make the recording of the plat a requirement of the building permit, they would like to see it as a requirement for a Certificate of O-cupancy. The process for recording the plat is under way but will take some time. They would like to get started on this building right a way. Spanel stated that the parking spaces are o:,ly 16' deep, but they provided a 6 foot wide sidewalk in front of them, with a raised curb, with the idea that two feet of the car would overhang. It was the general consensus of the Commission that the lift would be much Futter than the ramp. Discussion followed on the type of lift that would be used. Spanel stated that it has walls :.hat are about 40 inches tall. It is not meant to be used as a f,eight elevator. It is key operated, so there is restricted access to it, it has less capacity of a commercial elevator. It is made for use on an occasional basis. Jack Hunn moved to grant final design approval with the PLANNI14G AND ZONING April 21, 1992 Page 8 of 12 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lots 2-12, Filing 4, Eaglebend Subdiv_ sion_,_ Eaglebend _CIubhouse. Final Design Review.. (cont) recommendation to substitute the lift in lieu of the ramp, it at all possible, and the condition that the final plat be recorded prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Sue Railton seconded. After discussion, Hunn amended his motion to include the condition that the landscaping in the right-of-way be approved by Staff. Sue Railton seconded the amendment. The motion carried unanimously. Tract B. Block 1. Filing 2,__Es9_lebend_Su.bd.ivision,__ Eaglebend Housing Project, Conceptual Design_Rev_iew Curnutte stated that this project will be known as the Alpines at Eaglebend. What it is, essentially, is a continuation of the theme begun on Lots 1 and 2. He stated that this will be more than a design review situation. It will be going through the zoning process. At this time Tract B is zoned and platted for 30 units, and the uses are everything except single family. Therefore, a PUD amendment will need to be done to allow this proposal to be constructed. This will be a public hearing process, both for the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Town Council. There will be 19 single family homes on this property, with four different architectural looks, four different colors, and four different trim colors. Each two houses will share a common driveway, except for Lots 17, 18, and 19 which will all share the same drive. The lots will range in size from 5,000 square feet to a maximum of 7,000 square feet. Each home will meet the setback requirements of 25 feet in front, 10 feet in rear and 7 foot side setback. Maximum building height will be 35 feet. Maximum site coverage will not exceed 25% nor will the habitable floor area exceed 40%. The applicants intend to offer four different model homes ranging from 1,200 to 1,500 square feet, ,ncluding unfinished basements. Each unit will have a two car garage, fireplace, asphalt shingles, and hardboard siding. No two similar models will be next to each other. Curnutte reviewed the allowed fireplace types. Rick Pylman stated that, although this is a conceptual revelw and no action will be taken at this time, Staff feels that this is a good project. One of the goals of the Town is to round out the community in terms of housing that 1s available to local people and this would meet a need that is out there. Jeff Spanel stated that the land would be owned in fee simple. The owners would work out their own solutions for snow removal, etc. Ift PLANNING AND ZONING April 21, 1992 Page 9 of 12 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Subdivision,_ Eaglebend wont) Mr. Spanel described how they plan to try to make each house look different from others, by turning them differently, applying the siding differently, etc. Discussion followed on the landscaping. Mr. Spanel stated that they would like to keep these houses in a starter range of pricing, therefore, they would just sod the front, seed the back yards, and provide for a few trees in the front, but allow the homeowners to do a lot of the landscaping themselves, possibly even put some landscaping covenant that they would, within two years of owning the house, have to provide additional landscaping. It was the general consensus of the Commission that some landscaping should be done to help the streetscape. Discussion followed on the proposed siting of the houses, the "floating" fireplaces, proposed colors, common drives and parking situations, controlling the mix, etc. As this was a conceptual review, no formal action was taken at this time. Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at BeaverCreek_ Subdivision,_ Christie Lodge, Proposed Building -Modifications, Final _Design Review John Perkins stepped down as a voting member of the Commissioi due to a conflict of interest. Buz Reynolds was acting chairman in the absence of Clayton McRory. Jim Curnutte stated that Steve Johnson of "Alside Inc.", and John Perkins would like to talk about the new steel siding that they are proposing for the Christie Lodge. At the March 3rd meeting the Commission looked at seven different catagories of changes for the Christie Lodge. The applicant is asking for approval of two of those items: 1. The steel siding, color mist grey. All appurtenant trim pieces and flashings will match. The framed balcony openings will be white. The storefront colors are not available at this time. 2. Changing out the timber retaining walls with a cracked fin similar to what was used on the bridge. Curnutte stated that the materials are acceptable and the visual appearance should not be any problem as viewed from Burr-unding properties and public ways. Staff recommends approval of the two requested changes to the Christie Lodge. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 Page 10 of 12 John Perkins provided a sample of the mist grey color. He described how they plan to wrap the openings of the balconies in a white product and they would also do that in the portal openings. The railings will be repainted black. Perkins stated that they are still working on the accent color. He stated that he would like to incorporate a colored metal roof, in the areas that are now asphalt, that will be the same color as the accent color. They would like to come back in two weeks with the accent colors. They are considering green or maybe a rich burgundy. Considerable discussion followed on the features of the steel siding. Discussion followed on some of the other modifications that will be done in the future. Perkins stated that he will be back for approval of the next steps. The estimated time involved in installing the siding and the painting is 120 da,s to 180 days. Discussion followed on the gaps in some of the railings. Discussion followed on the application of the siding material. DiscusL;ion followed on using a different material on the storefront sections. Discussion followed on replacing the timber retaining walls with concrete. Further discussion followed on the gaps in the railings. Jack Hunn moved to grant final design approval to Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Christie Lodge, as presented, with the following conditions: 1. Final design of the retaining walls be submitted for the Commission to review. 2. Submit and return with the final choice of accent color. 3. Immediately remove the 4 ski storage houses that are on site and with a recommendation that the gaps in the railings, which present a safety hazard, be filled in. 4. That an alternative material be considered for the commercial levels. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. John Perkins resumed his seat as Chairman and voting member of the Commission PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 Page 11 of 12 Reading and approval of the Planning and_Zonina Commission Meeting Minutes for April 7, 1992, Henry Vest moved to approve the mirostes for the April 7, 1992 meeting. Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Other Business Rick Pylman stated that he has been in contact with the owners of Radio Shack and they will be in for approval. Mr. Pylman their gave the Commission an updated report on the matter of the Diamond Shamrock discussion at the Town Council meeting. He stated that the Mayor had asked for a review at the next council meeting. After some discuss?on, Derek Pysher made a motion to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission, wnich was approved. Rick stated that unless the Diamond Shamrock people come back and start the process over again, the matter is basically closed. Discussion followed on the installation of the fence at the Claivin. Pylman stated that it is still under construction. The Commission asked Staff if they could have a presentation on tho streetscape at a future meeting. Buz Reynolds asked if there was any way that they could get some pocket parks done in Wildridge? Discussion followed on what could possibly be done. Buz Reynolds moved to adjourn, Patti Dixon seconded and the meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully, submitted. Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary i a s PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES April 21, 1992 Page 12 of 12 Commission J. Perki S. Rail on C. McRo y _ A. Reynolds P. Dixon H. Vest Hunn al S Date