Loading...
PZC Packet 021693STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 1 Stone Creek Condos Lot 4, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Mr. Jim Poppleton of Property and Rental Management Co. Special Review Use / Accessory Apartment INTRODUCTION Jim Poppleton of Property and Rental Management Co.( is requesting a Special Review Use approval for the construction of one accessory apartment in addition to the maximum allowable density on Lot 4, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, the Stone Creek Condos. The proposal is to convert an existing common area / amenities room into a 375 square foot dwelling unit for an on-site maintenance person. This unit will be owned by the Condominium Association and cannot be scld as a separate unit. As proposed, this conversion of space would not alter the exterior of the building. With the addition on the accessory apartment the parking requirement for the Stone Creek Condos would be 59 spaces; the project currently has 61 spaces. Uses by Right in this zone district are: 1. Multiple -family dwellings including townhouses, condominiums, apartments. Special Review Uses in this zone district are: 1. Home Occupations 2. Residential Bed and Breakfast 3. Above -ground Public Utility installation 4. Church 5. One Accessory Apartment Per lot In Addition to the Maximum Allowable Density 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 complies with all requirements imposed by the Zoning Code. W STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION a February 16, 1993 Page 2 W Stone Creek Condos Lot 4, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Mr. Jim Poppleton of Property and Rental Management Co. Special Review Use / Accessory Apartment B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive Plan; COMMENT: The proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive Plan. C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses. Such compatibility may be expressed in appEzirance, architectural scale and features, site design, and the control of any adverse impacts including noise, dust, odor, lighting, traffic, safety, etc. COMMENT: This proposal is compatible with adjacent uses as it does not alter the exterior of the existing building. It appears that other than minimal construction traffic and the traffic generate by the on-site manager there are no adverse impacts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommendation for the request to convert an amenities room into a accessory apartment is for approval as submitted. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public Hearing 4. Close Public Hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Tom Allender Planner STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 3 Stone Creek Condos Lot 4, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Mr. Jim Poppleton of Property and Rental Management Co. Special Review Use / Accessory Apartment PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted (' ) Approved with recommended conditions ( j Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) ( ) Date Patti Dixon, Se cretar The fnmmiccion approved The Special Review Use for Lot 4 Block 2, Benchmark ,__fnllnwi n9 rritaria• A. The proposed use complies with all requitements imposed by the Zoning Code. B. The proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensicr Plan. C. The proposal is compatible with adjacent uses as it does not alter the exterior of the existing building and it appears that other than minimal construction traffic and traffic venerated by the on-site manager, there are no adverse impacts. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 1 Lot 4, Wildridge Acres Robert and Trudy Matarese Variance from Setback INTRODUCTION Robert and Trudy Matarese have submitted an application requesting that they be granted a variance of 8 feet from the required front yard setback. The garage on the existing residence appears to encroach into the 20 foot front setback by 8 feet. Lot 4 is 0.60 of an acre and is located at the west end of the Shepard Ridge cul-de-sac. The builder, Bob Kedrowski, received final design review approval for the residence on August 6, 1991, a temporary certificate of occupancy was issued November 7, 1991 a final certificate of occupancy was issued to the owners, Corwin -Brown, on August 28, 1992. In October of 1992 the new owners, the Matereses, brought to the attention of the Planning Staff a discrepancy between the original Improvement Location Certificate from October of 91, and their ILC from September of 92. The latter survey revealed the encroachment into the front yard setback. Staff has no explanation for the discrepancy, however, we are proceeding as if the latter survey is correct. The app.icants are obtaining quit claim deeds from all the utility Companies which have an interest is the setback as it also serves as a utility easement. STAFF COMMENTS: 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. COMMENT: Wildridge Acres has been essentially built out for a Year, in that time staff has not received any complaints from adjoining property owners about the encroachment, nor had staff perceived any problem with the location of the structure. Two adjoining property owners contacted staff in response to the notice of this hearing they received and indicated they have no problem with the structure. staff feels that there is not a problem with the relationship of the requested variance to existing and potential uses and structures in the vicinity. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 2 Lot 4, Wildridge Acres Robert and Trudy Matarese Variance from Setback b. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achiev:n compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity. COMMENTS: The applicant discovered the discrepancy and the encroachment during the process of purchasing the home and brought it to the attention of staff. The encroachment existed prior to the applicants purchasing the property and they were not a party to the creation of the encroachment. It is important to understand that the ultimate effect of a denial would be the removal of part of an existing residence. For these reasons staff feels that a denial of this variance in order to acheive uniformity of treatment would be an unnecessary and unreasonable hardship to place on the applicants. C. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, an public safety. COMMENTS: The requested variance would have virtually no effect on the above conditions or facilities. d. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the requested variance. COMMENTS: Staff has not identified any other factors for the Commission to consider. FINDINGS RF1 IRED: 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 granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improveoents in the vicinity. a STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND 'ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 3 Lot 4, Wildridge Acres Robert and Trudy Matarese Variance from Setback C. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: i. The strict or lite -al 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 conditicns applicable to the s�ce of the variance that do not apply generally 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 AND FINDINGS• Staff recommendation is for approval because the applicants did not create the hardship, they brought the encroacment to our attention, and the effects of a denial would constitue a unneccessary and unreasonalbe hardship. We recommend the findings from Section 17.36.050 A, B, C(i) of the Avon Municipal Code. RECOMMENDED_ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Tom Allender Planner iw fa :7 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 4 Lot 4, Wildridge Acres Robert and Trudy Matarese Variance from Setback PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted (� ' Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) ��) Date 11� Patti Dixon, Secretary �. The Commission approved the setback variance request, citing the following findings: _ A. That the grantingof the variance will not constitute a grant of special -�- � � •� � �- a �� �� � �• � .�• � �• � 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: 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 !T_t_a2ply generally to other _ properties in the vicinity, iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privile es- en o ed bathe owners of other properties in the vicinity. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Lot 3, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Zone District Text Amendment - Neighborhood Commercial INTRODUCTION Chapter 17.28 of the Town of Avon Zoning Code addresses amendments to the Zoning Code and District Map. Amendments to the text of the Zoning Code may be initiated by the Town Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or by written application of any resident or property owner of the Town. Thomas Nevison, as owner of Lot 3, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision is petitioning the Town to add Newspaper Facility as a permitted use within the Neighborhood Commercial Zone District. There are currently eight (8) parcels of land within Avon which are zoned Neighborhood Commercial. Six of those parcels are located at the east end of Nottingham Road, two are currently developed; the Coastal Mart service station and the Pizza Hut restaurant. The other two Neighborhood Commercial lots are Lots 1 and 2 of the Nottingham Station Subdivision, located on Hurd Lane. The stated purpose of the Neighborhood Commercial Zone District is: "The Neighborhood Commercial Zone District is intended to provide sites for commercial facilities and services for the principal benefit of residents of the community and also to highway oriented convenience commercial needs.' The current allowed uses are retail stores, professional offices, car wash, restaurants, accessory apartments, and churches. The Special Review Uses are automobile service station and repair and aboveground utility installations. As stated previously the only existing developer-ot in this zone district consists o* a gas station and a Pizza Hut. Mr. Nevison, the owner of Lot 3, Block 1, Benchmark. at Beevor Creek Subdivision has a sales contract with Jim Pevelech, the publisher of the Vail Daily newspaper. Mr. Pavelich desires to consolidate his newspaper operation into one facility, to de constructed on Lot 3. Currently the Vail Daily hes offices in the Town of Vail, and maintains a printing facility on fNtcalf Road in Avon, in the Industrial Commercial Zone District. Although the r,awspcnper offices are certainly an allowed use, the Staff has interpreted the printing portion of the operation as on industrial type use. The estabiiahmen,t of this type of use in the STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 2 Lot 3, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Zone District Text Amendment - Neighborhood Commercial Neighborhood Commercial District will require an amendment to the Zoning Code text. Criteria For Review, Recommendation,_and_Aprpoval Chapter 17.28.080 of the Zoning Code establishes the following criteria for evaluation in reviewing rezoning applications. A. Is the proposed rezoning justified by changed or chang,ng conditions in the character of the area proposed to be rezoned. STAFF RESPONSE: In 1991 the Town of Avon undertook a major restructuring of the existing zoning code. The new code included chanoe� to the subject properties and to the Neighborhood Comme tial District text. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 67, and 68 had been designated as Residential High Density Commercial. Allowed uses in the Residential High Density Commercial District included condominiums, apartments, hotels, lodges, retail shops, showrooms, restaurants, service shops, offices and automooile service stations. These six lots were rezor-�d to Neighborhood Commercial. The Neighborhood Commercial District was amended slightly; by moving service stations from Allowed to Special Review Use. The need for Newspaper Facilities was riot discussed during these changes. Since 1991, there have been no signiticant changes in the area which would justify the rezoning, although it appears that ..his type of use was not contemplated by the Zoning Code at the time it was written or amended. This type of facility would not be allowed as a use by right in any current Town of Avon Zone District. B. Is the proposed rezoning consistent with the town s Comprehensive Plan. STAFF RESPONS_E: The vision statement of the Comprehensive Plan includes the following paragraph: 'Development of facilities and activities which not only enhance the Town's role as a principle, year round residential and commercial center to Eagle County, but also foster a strong year round tourism base. Establishment of this use in the Town of Avon would certainly enhance the role as a principle year round residential and commercial center. However, (coal Al of the Comprehensive Plan is "Ensure that all land uses are located in aDDroprlat.e location® with appropriate controls." e STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 3 Lot 3, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Zone District Text Amendment - Neighborhood Commercial Staff has concern with the proposed change as submitted. Adding "Newspaper Facilities" as an allowed use in this zone district opens the zone district to a class of use which was not envisioned in the creation of the district and does not appear to refloct the purpose of the district. The Staft would be more comfortable adding "Commercial Printing Facility" as a Special Review Use. this would allow more discretion over future use of these properties and would allow the Town to ensure that each individual application is compatible with the district intent. C. Is the proposed use compatible with the surrounding area or uses. STAFF RESPONSE: The specific desire of the applicant does appear to be compatible with the surrounding area and uses, however, it is difficult to say that the requested amendment is compatible. To add newspaper facilities as an allowed use removes any further discretionary review ability. There may very well be instances of this application that would not De compatible or desirable within this district. D. Are adequate facilities available to serve development for the type and scope suggested by the proposed zone. STAFF RESPONSE: All necessary utilities are in place to serve this type of development. The existing road is capable of handling the traffic, including the loading and delivery neeas anticipated by this use. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The Staff believes the specific building any. use that are Door. shown for Lot 3 are compatible with the area in general, however. we are not comfortable with the requested change to the zoning code text and recommend denim as it is reque.%ted. Staff be:ierae that the uitimate goal of the applicant ren be met without compromising the future ability of the ?own to Control lend uses b% adding "commercial printing facility sa a ipectsi Mwvie>. u" to the Neighborhood Commercial Zone District end rocomraend that the Planning and Zoning Commisuion reccxvitand aGprjyei or the above mentioned text amendment. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 4 Lot 3, Block 1, Beni:hmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Zone District Text Amendment - Neighborhood Commercial RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Open Public hearing 4. Close Public hearing 5. Commission Review 6. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, �J iCC u Rick Pylnan Director of Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( 1 Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn Date _Patti Dixon, Secretary The Commission amended the applicant's request to make newspaper facility a r■itted use in the Neighborhood Commercial District to "Commercial Printing Facility` as a Special Review Use in the Neighborhood Commercial District. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISFTON February 16, 1993 Page 1 Lot 12, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Thomas S. D'Agostino Variance from Parking Setback INTRODUCTION Dough DeChant of Shepherd Construction Resources and Mike F.tem of Valley Wide Plumbing, on behalf of Thomas S. D'Agostino of Valley Wide Plumbing are requesting a variance from the required 10 foot front setback for parking. This lot is located on the west side of Metcalf Road between the Warner Building and the Troxel Warehouse. It is approximately .69 acres in size, the lot slopes to the east toward Metcalf Road. The zoning is IC-Industrial/Commercial. The applicant's intent is to pave to the front property line and then landscape the ROW between Metcalf Road and the parking area. There is a vertical separation between the Road and the proposed parking which supplies some visual buffering. The applicant has indicated that this is necessary to maximize their parking area, they need parking for 17 vans, employee vehicles, and customers. Their submitted design shows 41 spaces; the Town ordinance stipulates a minimum of 7.9 spaces. Staff has looked at the layout and believes it is possible to provide 19 spaces without encroaching into the parking setback. STAFF COMMENTS: APPROVAI. 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, COMMENT: Approval of the variance would n_ parking in relative clone proximity to traffic on Metcalf Road, visually this could be mitigated, however, if Metcalf In ever widened, has paved shoulders or a sidewalk added that buffer would be lost. h. The degree to Which relief furps the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a wpar.lfled regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility SM uniformlt, of trwatmont among sites in the vicinity. W I% a ft STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 2 Lot 12, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Thomas S. D'Agostino Variance from Parking Setback COMMENTS: Relief from the parking setback requirement is not necessary to achieve uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity of Lot 12. Staff cannot recall a similar variance being granted in this area. The adjoining lots have similartopography and uses and have not ask for or received parking setback variances. C. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, an public safety. COMMENTS: The requested variance would have little effect on the above conditions or facilities other than the potential visual impact on Metcalf Road. d. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the requested variance. COMMENTS: Other factors for the Commission to consider are a lack of hardship on the part of the applicant and the precedent an approval would create. It is possible through design to come very close to accommodating the amount of parking the applicant wants, Town requirements can be met without a variance, and this lot is very similar to others in the area that have not required a variance. Because of the lack of hardship, an approval of this variance would make it very difficult for this commission to ever deny a parking setback variance in the future. FINDINGS REOUIRF.D: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following findings before granting a variance: A. That the gra-sting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity. B. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or naterieily injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. C. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 3 Lot 12, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Thomas S. D'Agostino Variance from Parking Setback 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 not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity; The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS• Staff recommendation is for denial. of the variance because of lack of hardship, the precedent an approval would create and the inability to apply finding from Section 17.36.050 A, Ci, Cii, or Ciii. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2.. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Tom Allender Planner '01N '_1 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 4 Lot 12, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Thomas S. D'Agostino Variance from Parking Setback PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied o ( ) Date �� Patti Dixon, Secretary The Commission den -.ed the requested parking setback variance, citing the lack of a hardshin_ and tho nrarnn,A.n+ o„- STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Lot 12, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek StevAgi. Commercial/Industrial Building Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Dough DeChant of Shepherd Construction Resources and Mike Etem of Valley Wide Plumbing on behalf of Thomas S. D'Agostino of Valley Wide Plumbing are requesting a conceptual design review for a proposed 18,000 square foot commercial/industrial building on Lot 12, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. This lot is located on the west side of Metcalf Road between the Warner Building and the Troxel Warehouse. It is approximately .69 acres in size, the lot slopes to the east toward Metcalf Road. The zoning is IC-Industrial/Commercial. The proposed building is a two stories high metal, Butler type building finished in a stone white with dark bronze trim. The roof would be a metal standing seam, also finished in white. The building would contain space for offices, dispatcher, warehousing, servicing vehicles, a laundry and restrooms. The applicant is also requesting a variance from setback for parking, because of this staff is unable to evaluate the landscaping proposed until the parking design is finalized. STAFF COMMENTS Since this is a Conceptual Design Review, recommendation will be provided. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted Tom Allender Planner. no formal staff STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 1 Lot 62, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Donald McMahan Final Design Review INTRODUCTION Eric Vogelman, Architect and Donald McMahan are proposing a single family residence on Lot 62, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision and are requesting final design review approval. This project went through conceptual design review on November 17, 1992 and received positive comments. However, after considerable discussion concerning the proposed mental roof a work session was scheduled and held on December 1, 1992. At that time this Commission told the applicant to move forward on their design with the metal roof. The Commission stated that metal roofs could be considered in Wildridge on a case by case basis if the following conditions are net: 1. Subtle, low gloss colors are used. 2. Seam spacing is at a minimum of 18 inches. 3. The roof material be no lighter than 24 gauge. 4. The applicant supply a large sample. 5. Integrated trim pieces must be utilized. 6. A metal roof must be compatible with the architectural design. The proposed residence is approximately 3000 square feet in size, and includes an attached two car garage. The architectural design is a southwestern style with off-white stucco as theprimary building material, logs will be used as accent elements. The roof form is a combination of flat and gable forms. The proposed roof material for the gable forms is a patina green, 26 gauge, metal with standing seams. The proposed landscape plan is dominated by dry land species and appears to be appropriate to the site. [• 40 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 2 Lot 62, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Donald McMahan Final Design Review STAFF COMMENTS The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of the proposed project: 6.11 - The conformance with the Zoning Code anti other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. C014MENT: This proposal conforms with the Zoning Code and all other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. 6.12 - The suitability of the improvement, including type and quality of materials of which it is to be constructed &nd the site upon which it is to be located. COMMENT: These improvements, as proposed, are appropriate to the neighborhood, high quality materials are being used throughout. The structure has been designed to compliment the site, it appears than minimal site disturbance and regrading will he required. 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. COMMENT: The project appears to be well designed, and should have little or no adverse site impacts on adjacent properties. 6.14 - The compatibility of the proposed improvement with site topography. COMMENT: The project appears to have bean designed with compatibility of the site's topography in mind. It will require minimal site disturbance and regrading. 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvements an viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public. ways. COMMENTS: There is not a dominent design theme in this area of Wildridge, this residence should be visually compatible with the neighborhood. 6.16 - The objective that no improvement be on similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired. COMMENTS: Because of the lack of a dominant design thmmt In the area, staff saes no conflict with this criteria. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 3 Lot 62, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivis:_on Donald McMahan Final Design Review 6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs of the Town of Avon. COMMENTS: This proposal is in general conformance with the adopted goals, policies and programs of the Town of Avon. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval, with the condition that the metal areas f the roof follow these guidelines: 1. Seam spacing be a minimum of 18 inches. 2. The roof material be no lighter than 24 gauge. 3. Integrated trim pieces must be utilized. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review 4. Commission Action Respectfully submitted, Tom Allender Planner STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 4 Lot 62, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Donald McMahan Final Design Review PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions (L� Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Wit r ) Date Z Patti Dixon, Secretary c The Commission granted final design review approval with the followinq conditions: 2. The rGof material be ne lighter than 26 gauge 3. Intergrated trim pieces must be utilized. ,,w :�"s STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Page 1 Lot 58, Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Toni and Bruce Sindlinger Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Staff received the completed application form for this SF residence by fax on Friday the 5th of February, plans were delivered on Friday the 12th of February. Staff has not had an opportunity to review this proposal. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Table Application until March 2, 1993 Respectfully submitted, Tom Allender Planner PLANNING AND ZONING ACTTON Approved as submitted ( ) Approved with recommended conditions ( ) Approved with modified conditions ( ) Continued Denied ( ) e ) Date Patti Dixon, Secreta 4 The Commission tabled this application until the !larch 2, 1993 meeting due_ to the lack of information being provided in time for a review by Staff. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Lot 291 Block 1, Jim Klein Duplex Residence Conceptual Design INTRODUCTION Wildridge Subdivision Review Jim Klein is requesting a Conceptual Design Review for a proposed duplex residence on Lot 29, Block 1, Wi.ldridge Subdivision. This lot is located on the east side of Long Spur. It is approximately 0.35 acres in size. The lot slopes to the west at about 15 percent. The zoning is SPA with a duplex designation. The proposed duplex in a mirror image, two stories high structure with a walk out basement. It has approximately 2100 square feet of habitable space per side, not including the attached garages. The structure, as proposed, is within all Town height, lot coverage and setback restrictions. The exterior is predominantly finished in an Antique White stucco with 1 X 8 channel lap natural finish cedar siding. Window trim will be 2 X 8 cedar, door trim will be 2 X 4 cedar, the facia will be 1 X 10 cedar, all with a "Blue Shadow" stain; soffits will be natural 3/8 fir. The roof form is an offset gable, that will be finished with 320 # Tampco's Redwood asphalt shingles. STAFF COMMENTS Since this is a Conceptual Design Review, recommendation will be provided. RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted Tom Allender Planner no formai staff STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION February 16, 1993 Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision Arthur S. Barrows and Luann Peiffer Multifamily Residence Conceptual Design Review INTRODUCTION Arthur Barrows and Luann Peiffer are requesting a Conceptual Design Review fDr a proposed multifamily project on Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision. The proposal is for one building to contain 6 one bedroom apartments with garages. The lot is located on the north side of West Wildwood Road just above Wildwood Townhomes, Building C. It is a 1.62 acre lot which slopes to the west at about 27 percent. Zoning is SPA with 6 units allowed. The units have approximately Boo square feet of living irea above the garage and laundry / utility room. The exterior is finished in a wood siding, specifics of type and color have not been supplied. The gable roofs have windows incorporated into the western side, the shingles will be asphalt, specifics of type and color have not been supplied. The site plan indicates a drive way with a very tight turning radius and a 20 percent grade. There is no landscape plan. Circulation in the parking area appears to be questionable. The structure, as proposed, is within all Town height, lot coverage and setback restrictions. STAFF COMMENTS Since this is a Conceptual Design Review, recommendation will be provided. ACTION 1. Introduce Application 2. Applicant Presentation 3. Commission Review/Discussion Respectfully submitted Tom Allender Planner no formal staff