Loading...
PZC Minutes 111693• RECORD PROCEEDINGS 40% PLANNINGG AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 A Planning and Zoning Commission Worksession was held from 6:00 to 7:30 PM Items discussed were impervious materials and landscape coverage of lots, setbacks, and duplex subdivisions. The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on November 16 1993, at 7:30 P.M. in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Perkins. Members Present: John Perkins, Jack Hunn, Patti Dixon„ Henry Vest Rhoda Schneiderman, Sue Railton, Buz Reynolds Staff Present: Steve Amsbaugh, Director of Community Development, Mary Holden, Town Planner, Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary All members were present at roll call. Lot 33 Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Shearwood Residence, Landscape Plan, Final Design Review Mary Holden stated that the applicant has submitted a revised landscape plan, as requested, which includes two additional 8' spruce, one additional 3" caliper cottonwood and they have provided information on the rock wall, they have added a sod area, and they are showing a line of site disturbance of the adjacent property. She stated that their main concerns with this application is that there is no irrigation proposed for the sod area, or for the planted areas. Also, Staff questions if it is a true fine of site disturbance on the adjacent property. Staff would recommend approval with the following conditions: 1. The appropriate notes be added to the Landscape Plan to show the true site disturbance on adjacent Lot 50 and recommended revegetation for that area be approved by Staff. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 2 Lot 33. Block I. Wildridee Subdivision. Shearwood Residence. Landscape Plan, Final Design Review, cont 2. The rock wall be dimensioned on the Landscape Plan. 3. The plan reflect an irrigation system. Scott Shearwood stated, with regards to the disturbed area on Lot 50, the final grade has been taken care of. They are waiting until spring to revegetate. The sod was added to accommodate the mud and erosion at the front of the house. Regarding the irrigation system, this house is sold and they will be full time residents, and he feels that an irrigation system is totally necessary. Also, the rock wall is in place and is to scale as plan shows. Chairman Perkins asked if the applicant had an agreement with the owner of Lot 50 regarding how the lot would be revegetated? Shearwood stated that the only conversation with the owner of Lot 50 has been with the Staff. The owner has never approached him. Perkins asked if he had permission from the owner of lot 50 to disturb his property? Shearwood stated that it was done by carelessness on the part of the excavator. He stated that he has pictures of what was there prior to the disturbance. Most of it was in the area where the utility mains were run and the vegetation was nothing much more than sticker bushes and thistles. He plans to revegetate with the natural grass mix. Perkins asked what has transpired between Staff and the owners of Lot 50. Steve Amsbaugh stated that the owner of Lot 50 called him a couple days after they began excavation and was concerned that they felt the home was being built too close to the property line. Staff has measured that and the location of the house is OK, but while there they discovered that the backhoe operator had driven all over the other lot and stockpiled materials there, and sort of used that as a turnaround area, because there was not enough room on the backside of the lot to maneuver, and in doing that, ripped up the native vegetation. Amsbaugh stated that, through telephone conversations, he assured the lot owner of Lot 50 that Staff would monitor and ask for revegetation of that area. He stated that he thinks why they have not approached the applicant directly. Buz Reynolds stated that the builder should encourage the applicant to install an irrigation system, because it is so and up there. Jack Hunn asked if the Staff had confirmed that the building is where it is supposed to be on the site. Steve Amsbaugh stated that they did. Hunn asked if they also confirmed that the driveway grades match the approved plans. Amsbaugh stated that the Town Engineer worked closely with the applicant on the driveway. The problem is that they are keying off of someone else's driveway. The last time he was out there it seemed that they have built it as it was approved. Shearwood stated that PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 3 Lot 33, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision_ Shearwood Residence Landscape Plan Final Design Review_ cont there has been a change in the culvert and he pointed out on the Warnke plan what was done. They extended the length of the culvert and widened the approach off the cul-de-sac. It allowed more length to pick up the grade as it comes into the parking area. Hunn stated that the revegetation of the adjacent property needs to be defined. Shrubbery, sagebrush was probably destroyed and grass seed doesdt necessarily replace that, in his view. With regard to the irrigation, he thinks an irrigation system should be required. It saves water and even though they are local people, they will go on vacation and it only takes about two days for things to dry up, up there. Patti Dixon stated that the revegetation should be done with the sagebrush and not just grasses. Also who will be watering the revegetation. The applicant stated that since this was an area where the main sewers were put in there was no sagebrush there. Dixon stated that she would encourage the installation of a sprinkler system. Henry Vest stated that he agrees with what Staff recommends. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she does not think they can force single family homeowners to put in sprinkler systems. Regarding the revegetation, straw should be used so it would retain the moisture. Sue Railton stated that she echoes the previous comments. The applicant stated that he has seen, on areas that have used straw, the straw is blown off in the strong winds of Wildridge. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that you would need to use the mats. Jack Hunn moved to grant approval for the landscape plan revisions for Lot 33, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, subject to the Staff Conditions 1, 2, and 3. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried with a (our to three vote, Sue Railton, Rhoda Schneiderman and Buz Reynolds voting nay. LJ. Block 1. Lodge at Avon Subdi hsion. Avon Town Square Conceptual Design Review Mary Holden stated that this is the second conceptual review for this retail/commercial office building of approximately 25,000 square fee:. It is three levels., which includes a basement. One of Staffs main concerns is that the site, currently as proposed, is tight. There is a minimum landscape requirement of 20% that needs to be met. This excludes sidewalks. Staff is concerned that the site will not be able to meet that 20%. They are proposing to provide off-site parking, which will be on Lot 2, owned by the same people. This would require a special review use. There is a streetscape design for Benchmark Road and Staff will be working with the applicant to develop this. The applicant will need the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 4 Lot 1. Block 1. Lodge at Avon Subdivision Avon Town Square, Conceptual Design Review. (cont) following approvals for this project: Final Design Approval, Special Review Use for Off-site Parking, Final Plat Amendment - Lot Line Revision, and Condominium Final Plat. Holden stated that they are proposing to move the lot ten feet south to increase the size of Lot 1. As a conceptual review, Staff has no recommendation at this time. Al Williams stated that he was here with Jim Nordley, the architect of record, and Jack Berga, the homeowners construction representative. He stated that the original project was a three story 40,000 square foot building with a pad site restaurant that also had a fifteen foot setback variance that had been approved. Recently they decided that this really work to accomplish what they are trying to do and meet the streetscape plans, etc., so they moved the building back ten feet and also, they took another look at the second site. They are still envisioning, on Lot 2, a three story building with certain setbacks on roof lines, with underground parking. Instead of having a parking area in front of the building, they choose to move the building forward and be able to enter it from the rear. They look at the total site as Avon Town Square, with the Slifer, Smith and Frampton building being Phase I. They feel they have a much better flow in terms of parking and traffic within the site. He then turned the meeting over to Jim Nordley. Mr. Nordley described how the walkout level came about, pointing out on drawings each level of the buildings. He provided samples of the materials to be used, stating that the building will be mainly a stucco building and will actually be two tones, a deeper taupe color for the base of the building and a lighter field color for the upper part of the building. There will be accent colors for the coping and the roof somewhere in the same range. They have softened the colors to blend in with the community. Sue Raikon asked if there would be any other colors besides what they have shown. The applicant stated that they are keeping the colors fairly subdued. He thinks that originally there may have been a building with a bright blue roof proposed. Staff has recommended that the stay with a more earth tone roof. Railton stated that those are pleasant colors, but maybe in the signage you need another accent color. Rhoda Schneiderman asked how the snow shed would be handled? The applicant stated that in the building itself there is actually a large gutter system on the upper roof, with a snow melt system and the drainage will be taken into the building and down. Schneiderman stated that she wouldn't mind seeing a semi -subdued fourth color, but maybe the signage would do a lot to add accent. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 5 Lot 1, Block 1. Lodge at Avon Subdivision. Avon Towne Square Conceptual Design Review. Cont) Henry Vest asked about the flat front of the building. The applicant stated that this is actually a flat portion of the roof back there for mechanical and they are still studying what that element wants to be. This is a carry over from the original design. That is a separate retail entrance for a major tenant on the corner and they may want something that relates to that. Vest asked where the trash enclosure would be. The applicant pointed out on the drawings where it would be. Patti Dixon stated that she thinks it is a good design. Jack Hunn asked how the parking lot issue from one project to another would affect the next phase. He asked if it was possible to consider both phases as one application, at least conceptually, so the Commission could understand how they would inter -relate? Al Williams stated that they have always approached it that the main building would get done. As well as they did in leasing it, etc, they could never get it financed. You can get financing for a project like this locally, you don't have any national tenants. There will be local people. They went with the concept of going out to a smaller building with the understanding that it would be condominiumized and the locals would be attracted. They have sold to people who can afford to buy the space, who can go to their local banks and get financing. Regarding the next building, he has a number of joint venture proposals and people that would like to buy whole floors. He stated that he can not start chopping this building apart, because the spaces are pre -sold. He wants to make it work and he wants to encroach on to Lot 2, as long as the integrity of Lot 2 will come into play. The building they have there is just the old building that was designed and they have made it work on this space, along with underground parking. There will be one condominium association for the total site, both lots. Jack Hunn asked if there was an approved plan for Lot 2. The applicant stated that the approval for that had expired. Hunn stated that Lot 2 will have to adapt to whatever you do on Lot 1, in terms of meeting the criteria. Hunn stated that, architecturally he thinks this is very attractive, but he thinks it could be made more colorful, maybe with the sign program. He questioned the landscape screen at the dumpster area. The applicant described how it would work in conjunction with the retaining wall. Discussion followed on how far away from the railroad the building on Lot 2 would be. Discussion followed on the shared parking between the two buildings. Buz Reynolds asked if the applicant felt comfortable that they can meet the parking requirements with the underground parking? The applicant stated that they felt that they could meet the requirements. Reynolds also felt that the building colors are rather bland. The applicant stated that Larry Ast, of Hightech Signs, is working on the sign program at this time. Chairman Perkins stated that he concurs with the previous comments. He feels that it is important to screen the dumpster area. He would also like to see a little more color, maybe on the roof. As long 0i r PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 5 Lot 1 Block 1. Lodge at Avon Subdivision Avon Towne Square, Conceptual Design Review Cont) Henry Vest asked about the flat front of the building. The applicant stated that this is actually a flat portion of the roof back there for mechanical and they are still studying what that element wants to be. This is a carry over from the original design. That is a separate retail entrance for a major tenant on the corner and they may want something that relates to that. Vest asked where the trash enclosure would be. The applicant pointed out on the drawings where it would be. Patti Dixon stated that she thinks it is a good design. Jack Hunn asked how the parking lot issue from one project to another would affect the next phase. He asked if it was possible to consider both phases as one application, at least conceptually, so the Commission could understand how they would inter -relate? AI Williams stated that they have always approached it that the main building would get done. As well as they did in leasing it, etc, they could never get it financed. You can get financing for a project like this locally, you don't have any national tenants. There will be local people. They went with the concept of going out to a smaller building with the understanding that it would be condominiumized and the locals would be attracted. They have sold to people who can afford to buy the space, who can go to their local banks and get financing. Regarding the next building, he has a number of joint venture proposals and people that would like to buy whole floors. He stated that he can not start chopping this building apart, because the spaces are pre -sold. He wants to make it work and he wants to encroach on to Lot 2, as long as the integrity of Lot 2 will come into play. The building they have there is just the old building that was designed and they have made it work on this space, along with underground parking. There will be one condominium association for the total site, both lots. Jack Hunn asked if there was an approved plan for Lot 2. The applicant stated that the approval for that had expired. Hunn stated that Lot 2 will have to adapt to whatever you do on Lot 1, in terms of meeting the criteria. Nunn stated that, architecturally he thinks this is very- attractive, but he thinks it could be made more colorful, maybe with the sign program. He questioned the landscape screen at the dumpster area. The applicant described how it would work in conjunction with the retaining wall. Discussion followed on how far away from the railroad the building on Lot 2 would be. Discussion followed on the shared parking between the two buildings. Buz Reynolds asked if the applicant felt comfortable that they can meet the parking requirements with the underground parking? The applicant stated that they felt that they could meet the requirements. Reynolds also felt that the building colors are rather bland. The applicant stated that Larry Ast, of Hightech Signs, is working on the sign program at this time. Chairman Perkins stated that he concurs with the previous comments. He feels that it is important to screen the dumpster area. He would also like to see a little more color, maybe on the roof. As long PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 6 Lot 1. Block 1 Lodge at Avon Subdivision Avon Town Square conceptual Design Review. (cont) as the parking works, he thinks they have a good project. He stated that as a conceptual review no action would be taken, but he hears a consensus that the Commission likes what has been presented and encourages them to proceed. Discussion followed on the applicant meeting the 20% requirement for landscaping. Lot 2 Block 5 Wildridge Subdivision Anderson/Connell Duplex Color Samples Final Design Review Mary Holden presented the color samples provided by the applicant, as requested by the Commission. Chairman Perkins cautioned the Commission not to get into redoing the colors if these are not acceptable. He feels it is the applicant's responsibility to bring other colors. Buz Reynolds stated that he feels the siding, against the hillside, will be a little too green and he would like to see a lighter color. Jack Hunn stated he is concerned about the pastel r3ture of the siding. Also, the green trim will be used quite extensively on the fascia, window trim, corner boards, and railings in an attempt to outline a lot of features, and he thinks the building will be very busy, a lot of contrast between the trim and siding color. Patti Dixon stated that, because there is so much trim, the trim color is too contrasting to the siding color. It should be more muted, and she thinks the siding color is too bright. Henry Vest, Rhoda Schneiderman and Sue Railton also echoed the same thoughts. Chairman Perkins stated that there is a consensus that the applicant needs to work on the colors. The comments were that the siding color is ioo bright and there is too much contrast with the trim color and this will make the building too busy. The applicant needs to look at bringing the trim and siding colors closer together. The roof has been approved, and there is no problem with the stucco. Paige Anderson stated that she had done some driving around Wildridge and had taken some pictures. She stated that there are a couple of buildings that have recently gone up with green stucco. She took a picture of one of the buildings with her sample board next to it and there is not any difference in color. Ms. Anderson stated that there are also a couple homes that have a high contrast level. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 7 Lot 2, Block 5. Wildridge Subdivision, Anderson/Connell Duplex_ Color Samples, Final Design Review, (cont) Chairman Perkins stated that clearly they have brought samples that are unacceptable to the board and those are the samples that they are acting on. The Commission could deny the application and the applicant would have aright to appeal it to the Town Council, or the Commission caa table it and the applicant can take the Commission's input and bring some other samples. The applicant stated that they would rather the Commission table this item. Henry Vest moved to table this application for color samples approval. Sue Railton seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Christie Lodae. Satellite Dish_ Design Review Chairman Perkins stepped down as a voting member of the Commission, due to a conflict of interest, turning the meeting over to Vice -Chairman Jack Hunn. Mary Holden stated that Christie Lodge Homeowners Association is requesting approval to place a six foot diameter satellite dish on the northwestern portion of their site, which is just east of their two existing dishes that are 10 feet in diameter and 12 feet in diameter. It does meet the requirements set forth in the code. Staffs main concern is with the screening of the dishes. During the approval of the other two dishes there were coniferous trees suggested to screen the dishes. They were never added. Staff is recommending approval of this application with the condition that coniferous trees are added to screen the dishes from the highway. Phyllis Lilischkies, Operations Manager for Christi Lodge, stated that for the last five years they have had Budget Rent A Car in their facility. They have left. Enterprise Leasing is coming in on December 1 st, and that is who the extra dish is for. They have a home office in Denver and their computer main frame is in St. Louis. All of their facilities are operated with a satellite dish. She stated that she was not there when the other dishes were put in and she does not know why there were not any trees planted. She stated that between the fence and the back side of the dish there is only about three feet. If you put an 8 to 10 foot tree back there, where will the foliage go? She stated that they will probably be replacing the fence next year. They would like to put in a fence that would coordinate with the look of the Christie Lodge. Discussion followed on coniferous trees not being practical for that area, and what landscaping is there now. Discussion followed on the cottonwoods that are there and it was suggested that another PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 8 cottonwood be added in the space where the break is in between the trees. It was suggested that Christie Lodge might approach the Highway Department for permission to put some landscaping on the north side of the fence. That would help to screen the dishes. Sue Railton moved to grant final design approval for the Christie Lodge satellite dish placement on Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, with the condition that landscaping be placed either on the property or on the Highway Department side of the fence. Patti Dixon seconded. Buz Reynolds asked if it would be left up to Staff to approve as far as screening. The Commission agreed that Staff would work out the specific quantities, species and location. The motion then carried unanimously. Lots 27/28, Block_ l,_ Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Mountain Center Trash Dumpster, Design Review Mary Holden stated that Les Shapiro is requesting approval to relocate his trash dumpster and enclosure; to change the western entry drive radius to blend with existing edge of pavement; add benches, trash receptacles and ash trays in three areas designated for landscaping and relocate landscaping elsewhere on site and to add planters in tow of the bench areas. In addition, on the western portion of the site, he and the adjacent property owner will be doing a picnic area and additional landscaping will be added in that area also. The benches and planters will be of the type specified in the design guidelines. Staff recommends approval of the requested modifications. Les Shapiro stated that as the project has been unfolding they recognized several things to make it more people fhendly and approve the building. He stated that he does not know how the trash dumpster got where it is. They would like to move it over to the side where it would be less visible and also provide an additional parking spot. They have extended the culvert in the ditch and are now able to cover it up and make a nice landscape feature there. They would like to bring the dumpster enclosure there and also add landscaping to that area. It was suggested that the enclosure walls be made higher. Les Shapiro stated that since They have a very professional Staff, he feels that decisions such as this proposal should be handled at a Staff level. Buz Reynolds moved to approve the modifications for Lots 27/28, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek as submitted. 4" W PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 Page 9 Lots 27/28, Block 1_ Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Mountain Center Trash Dumpster, Design Review, (cont) Jack Hunn seconded. The motion was amended to specify that the dumpster enclosure will be 12 feet wide and the walls will be 8 feet high. The motion carried unanimously. Readingand nd Approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes of November 2 1993 Jack Hunn moved to approve the minutes of the November 2, 1993, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting as submitted. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Other Business Steve Amsbaugh stated that they had received a request to approve a final landscape plan a month or so ago. They inspected the site at Lot 94, Block 1, Wildridge and on review of the plans they noticed that several of the plants were mis-located and of the wrong caliper and size. Also other site features, such as a child's play area had been added, and the driveway was not built in conformance with the site plan, and the stairwell for the house was slightly different. Amsbaugh stated that all these added up to where he felt uncomfortable at the Staff level approving and signing off on the landscape plan without one of two things happening. One option that was presented to the applicant was she come in with a proposal to supplement the existing landscaping, to try to bring it up to a level to what was approved. This has been done with other applicants before and usually they will come in and add the trees and plants, rather than come back to you all. The second option is to come back before the Commission with a modified landscape plan. Amsbaugh stated that Julie Huckaby was present to discuss this matter. Ms. Huckaby provided plans showing what is there now. She stated that the plan calls for all cottonwood trees and they varied the trees a bit. They have evergreens, crabapples and some other things so the landscaping would be pretty all year long instead of having all deciduous trees. Actually there is one more tree than is shown on the plans. As far as shrubs go, there are 41 instead of the 39 on the plans. They did change the driveway a little bit, but it took up the whole front yard and with two little kids they needed the yard. She described how they now turn around in the drive. Discussion followed on the sizes of the trees, which were all under the minimum required. The matter of an irrigation system was discusses. It was felt that funds for an irrigation system should be left in an escrow fund. Steve Amsbaugh stated that he does not see how she can sell the house without a CO. And he can't issue a CO without approval of the changes. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES November 16, 1993 6 Page 10 10 Other Business, cont Steve Amsbaugh stated that if the Commission approves the landscaping, he would like to see the plan redrawn correctly. It was suggested that she uses the new survey and show the correct landscaping on it for the files. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve the landscape and driveway changes for Lot 94, Block 1, Wildridge, with the following conditions: 1. An updated platted survey be furnished with the current landscaping drawn in on it. 2. Funds be escrowed at closing for the new owner to install a sprinkler system. Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously. The escrow will be 120% of the bid for installation of the system. The meeting was then adjourned at 9:15 PM. Respectfully submitted, Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary Cc J. I S. R. A. P. H. "Mull Vest t ^� J. Hunn