Loading...
PZC Packet 100488STAFF REPORT. TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION October 4, 1988 Lot 1, Block 1, Filing 2, Eaglebend Subdivision Two Single Family Residences Eaglebend Partnership - Laukar Investments Final Design Review INTRODUCTION Jeff Spanel and Mark Donaldson on behalf of Eaglebend Partnership-Laukar Investme,its are requesting final design review for two proposed sinc,le family detached residences on a portion of Lot 1, Block 1, Filing No. 2, Eaglebend Subdivision. The residences are intended to be platted az townhouses and the remaining portion of the lot will be left for future development yet unspecifieti. STAFF COMMENTS Section 6.00 - Design Guidelines Section 6.10 - Design Review Considerations: The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of a proposed project: Section 6.11 - The conformance with the Zoning Code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. Comment: The application is complete and is in conformance with applicable codes with the exception of tha following: Building location needs to be tied to lot lines - Material samples and exterior lighting proposals are to be shown at the meeting - Proposed fencing for Eaglebend - 6'-0" high, slat type, should be completed behind these buildings before occupancy to ensure safety from railroad traffic - Type of ownership proposed should be platted before final certificate of occupancy is issued Section 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. - Building type, intended use and exterior materials are generally in conformance with surrounding neighborhood and SPA plan. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Lot 1, Block 1, Filing 2, Eaglebend Subdivision Two Single Family Residences Eaglebend Partnership-Laukar Investments Final Design Review Page 2 of 4 - Landscaping is nominal but adequate for the purpose of softening building edges. - Landscape screening from future development is not addressed. - Proposal is generally in accordance w th Eagle - bend SPA zoning and plat. Section 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. - The proposed design does not significantly impact adjacent properties. Section 6.14 - The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography. - Site topography is level and very buildable as well as accessible. Section 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and ;_ublic ways. - The visual appearance is generally compatible with existing and proposed development. - Additional visual screening adjacent to proposed decks should be consideree for the purpose of providing privacy between residences, "open space" area, "future" development area and traffic or, Eaglebend Drive. Section 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. - Proposal is generally compatible with, but not identical to any other development in the neighborhood. Section 6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Lot 1, Block 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Two Single Family Residences Eaglebend Partnership-Laukar Investments Final Design Review Page 3 of 4 - District Goals for Eaglebend Subdivision have not been adopted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval conditioned by the following: - Additional landscaping be incorporated on the east and west sides of the proposed residences to better screen residences and parking from adjacent development. - Approval of exterior materials and lighting presented at the meeting. - Fencing between the railroad right-of-way and rear of Lot 1 where the residences occur be complete before certificate of occupancy is issued. - Proposed culvert length be adequate for drainage. Driveway should be constructed in accordance with Town of Avon standard details. - Building location will be dimensioned before building permit is issued. - Proposed townhouse subdivision lines be the limits of construction and that all disturbed areas be adequately eseeded with native grasses to match existing. - Type of ownership be platted and recorded before final certificate of occupancy is issued. Staff Report to the Planning and Zcn4.,.1 Commission October 4, 1988 Lot 1, Block 1, Filing 2, Eaglebend Subdivision Two Single Family Residences Eaglebend Partnership-Laukar Investments Final Design Review Page 4 of 4 RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Project; 2. Presentation by Applicant; 3. Commission Review of Aoplication; 5.. Act on Application. Respectfully submitted, 6�Ly Fritzlen Director of Com ity Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( Vr Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Date IU -qDenise Hi 11 , Secretary ` 14,4130, i i! The Commission granted final design review approval to this project, Drovided the recommendations contained in the staff report are in- corporated before the certificates of occupancies are issued. See attached sheet for recommendations Approval of exterior materials and lighting presented at the meeting. - Fencing between the railroad right-of-way and rear of Lot 1 where the residences occur be complete before the certificate of occupancy is issued. - Proposed culvert length be adequate for drainage. Driveway should be constructed in accordance with Town of Avon standard details. - Building location will be dimensioned before building permit is issued. - Proposed townhouse subdivision lines be the limits of construction and that all disturbed areas be adequately reseeded with native grasses to match existing. - Type of ownership be platted and recorded before final certificate of occupancy is issued. STAFF REPORT TO THF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION October 4, 1988 Lot 12, Block 1, Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Eaglebend Residences South Harbor Development Preliminary Design Review INTRODUCTION Jacqueline Montgomery of South Harbor Development Corporation is seeking preliminary design review approval for a proposed duplex on Lot 12, Block 1, Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision. STAFF COMMENTS Section 6.00 - Design Guidelines Section 6.10 - Design Review Considerations - The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of a proposed project: Section 6.11 - The c3nformance with the Zoning Code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. - The applicant is aware that there are several insufficiencies in the application, including landscape plan, survey, grading and drainage, required floor area and site coverage calculations. The proposed access is not in conformance with Town standards. Provision for car turn -around should be included on site plan so it is not necessary to back out onto street. Single road cut is recommended both for safety and reduced site coverage. Section 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. - Proposed use is in conformance with Eaglebend SPA plan. Proposed exterior materials are compatible with those in the neighborhood. Material samples were not submitted. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Lot 12, Block 1, Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Eaglebend Residences South Harbor Development Preliminary Design Review Page 2 of 3 Section 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. - Site is relatively level and easily buildable. Landscape plan was not submitted. Section 6.14 - The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography. - Site topography was not submitted. Section 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposer improvement as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. - The height and offsets in the elevations are generally compatible with existing development. Landscape screening for side yards should be considered. Section 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. - The proposed duplex is a mirror image plan with a seven Foot offset. The exact duplication may have a mutually negative monetary and aesthetic impact on the proposed units. Section 6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the sdopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. - There are no adopted district goals for Eaglebend Subdivision. STAFF RECOMMMENDATION Staff recommends preliminary approval with the following conditions: Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Lot 12, Block 1, Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Eaglebend Residences South Harbor Development Preliminary Design Review Page 3 of 3 - Completion of application by submitting required materials. - Redesign of driveway to Town of Avon standards. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Project; 2. Presentation by Applicant; 3. Commission Review of Application; 5. Act on Application. Respectfully submitted, L n Fritzlen Director of Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) withdrawn ( ) Date i17 - 4 -e) Denise Hill, Secretary ( /C The Commission granted preliminary design review approval with the condition that the applicant meet the Staff's recommendations, which are: Completion of application by submitting required materials; and Redesian of drivewav to Town of Avon standards. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION October 4, 1988 Tract O, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar Sign Variance Request INTRODUCTION L.A.L., Inc. dba Hole -In -The -Wall is requesting a sign variance to continue to be allowed to display, on the same terms approved previously, the 2 x 16 foot banner reading "Breakfast". The permit for the display of the banner expired on September 30, 1988. The applicant would like to continue the signage display past this date. STAFF COMMENTS Section 15.28.020 - 27 gives the definition of a temporary, sign as: Any sign, banner, pennant, or other device that directs persons to a special event, location, or offering that is not permanent in nature. Section 15.28.80 - M. Permits temporary signs, but they must be limited to a maximum size of thirty five square feet and not to be in place for more than one week per event. Also, the sign may only be displayed for only one event in any thirty day period. The proposed banner meets the new sign code ordinance size requirements, but, requires a variance for the length of time requested to be displayed. The following variance procedure is required: Section 15.28.090-B 2. Approval Criteria: Before acting on a variance 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; 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; C. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the requested variance. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar Sign Variance Request Page 2 of 3 3. 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 applicable to the site of the variance that do riot apply to other properties 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 In that there is no significant changes that would alter the evaluation of this applicantion, Staff recommendation remains the same as before, primarily: Should the Commission decide to grant a variance for the banner, the approval should be limited to a specific time frame, such as one year. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar Sign Variance Request Page 3 of 3 RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Project; 2. Presentation by Applicant; 3. Commission Review of Application; 5.. Act on Application. Respectfully submitted, OL Fritxle Director of Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended i Conditions (q/) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) I, Dateljp4-BJ> Denise Hill, Secretary G,b1J�-�•+�� The Commission granted approval for the variance under the provisions of paragraph 3. Findings required. Section a. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege in- consistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity; and Section B. (i) - The strict or literal interpretation and enforce - (see attached sheet) ment of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; and (ii) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity; and (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. The approval was granted with the condition that the applicant return for re-evaluation no later than May 1, 1989. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION October 4, 1988 Lots 65 and 66, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Proposed Commercial Development Otis Development Company Conceptual Site Plan Review INTRODUCTION Pat Barron and Tom Swarthout of Otis Development Company are presenting a site plan for conceptual review by the Planning and Zoning Commission of a proposed 16,000 square foot commercial building and a 2300 square foot drive in restaurant. The following design considerations were discussed with the applicant prior to the September 30, 1988 submittal. These concerns appear to have been addressed in the site plan presented. 1. Adequate pedestrian and vehicular interconnections to adjacent properties. 2. Conformance with open space, site coverage, parking and loading requirements. 3. Potential building code conformance problems that would be created by development adjacent to existing non -conforming structures at the north and west 4. Maintaining an unbuilt area on the west side of lot that has the potential to become a limited public thoroughfare. A future connection between the Benchmark Shopping Center parking lot and the Wal-Mart parking lot will relieve potential congestion on Beaver Creek Place as the area develops. This unbuilt area lies between the proposed drive-in restaurant and retail buildings. 5. The applicant has also incorporated a desirable site design feature, that being a small pond and landscape area to the west of the drive-in that could be used for outdoor dining. 6. Proposed use is in conformance with allowed zoning. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Lots 65 and 66, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Proposed Commercial Development Otis Development Company Conceptual Site Plan Review Page 2 of 3 STAFF RECOMMMENDATION The appropriateness of the intended uses and the general vehicular and pedestrian site circulation should be confirmed at the conceptual review level. Previous staff concerns appear to have been met at this time, therefore staff recommends that if the proposal is found in conFormance with applicable design considerations and adopted goals, the applicant continue on with design development, taking into consideration the Commission's comments and concerns. A copy of the adopted District One Goals is a part of this packet for your review. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Project; 2. Presentation by Applicant; 3. Commission Review of Application; 5. Act on Application. Respectfully submitted, Lynn Fritzi Director of Community Development 0 a Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission October 4, 1988 Lots 65 and 66, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Proposed Commercial Development Otis Development Company Conceptual Site Plan Review Page 3 of 3 PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION. Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) withdrawn (,Cr ) Date I(i -4 � Denise Hill, Secretary-_.kenw-E IUW The Commission felt that the use for this proposed development was definitely appropriate and encouraged the applicant to procedd, taking into consideration the following: The possibility of the incorporation of an interior mall and pedestrain interconnection between the existing walkway of Benchmark Shopping Center; The need to confirm the access and more information from the highway department; The possibility of incorporating the trash and screening for the loading area. s a