Loading...
PZC Minutes 091384RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING SEPTEMBER 13, 1984 The regular meeting of the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission was held on September 13, 1984 at 6:40 PM -,n the Town Council Chambers of the Town of Avon Municipal Complex, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Mike Blair. Members Present: Mike Blair, Mark Donaldson, Larry Kumpost, Cheryl Dingwell Members Absent: Tom Landauer, Jerry Davis, Pat Cuny Staff Present: Dan Fogland, Building and Zoning Administrator - Norm Wood, Director of Public Works - Maggie Lach, Recording Secretary Work Session Commission members mentioned concerns of Pizza Huts with brown roofs in several Colorado locations. Kumpost presented information regarding Town Council's action on subdivisions to be referred to Planning Commission for review and presented information regarding parking reduction for large lots. Commission reviewed and discussed Design Rules, 4.00 Exemptions along with the Sign Code and Sign Districts. Record shows that Tom Landauer arrived f,r the meeting at approximately 7:20 PM Action on Si n Code and DRB Rules Commission tscussed the same a draft submitted by Fogland regarding a district type Sign Code. Example: District 1 could be the IC Zone which is generally a traffic oriented commercial zone. Kumpost motioned to approve the sample district type Sign Code for general direction and format. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Revised Wording - Minor Changes - Desion Review Rules - Section 4.00 Exemptions This item reoards minor remodeling changes that could possibly be approved by Staff before coming to the Commission for review. The language of "Minor Changes" has been broken down to 3 parts to read: 1) minor remodeling projects such as, but not necessarily limited to replacement of doors, windows, vents or grills may be approved by Staff; 2) changes necessary to facilitate repairs or other minor deviations which do not significantly affect a change to the overall design or appearance of a building or site, may be approved by Staff; and 3) changes in wall openings or the addition of wall openings, such as windows, doors, louvers which conform to the pattern established in the original building design, may be approved by Staff. Planning and Zoning Meeting Minutes September 13, 1984 Page 2 of 7 Revised Wording - Minor Changes - Design Review Rules - Section 4.00 Exemptions, r__I. Uonaldson suggested that deviations be changed to moditications in item number 2. Commission members agreed with suggested changes and that recommendations be made to the Town Council. Kumpost motioned to approve the language of "Minor Changes" with the correction of "deviations" to "modifications". Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Section 3.10 - Miscellaneous Fee - $25.00 This fee would be changed from 100.00 plus, to a fee of $25.00 for minor re- modeling. Dingwell motioned to approve the miscellaneous fee as presented, Section 3.10. Donaldson seconded. Passed unanimously. New - 4.00 Exemptions - Design Review Rules This item deals with construction trailers on a construction site. This is a new section which would exempt the review for placement of a trailer by the Commission. The new addition to Exemptions 4.00, Design Rules would read: "Construction trailers located on the same site as the construction project, may be approved by the Staff." Donaldson suggested that perhaps job trailers with construction names written on them might fall under the Sign Code. Landauer felt there should be a time limit on the placement of the trailers. Dingwell suggested that trailers be allowed placement during construction and be removed within 30 days after completion of project. Kumpost agreed, but felt "completion" needed to be defined. Kumpost motioned to approve Section 4.00 Exemptions with the condition that Staff include language dealing with the duration of the permit for the trailer. Landauer seconded. Passed unanimously. Lot 46/47, Block 1, BM @ BC - Chambertin Townhouses - Landscape Plans - Continued from 8/9%84 Special Meeting Fogland presented application stating that Commission had requested verification of height of guardrails, how drainage between retaining walls would be treated and a landscape plan in conjunction with the new retaining walls. Commissions members reviewed landscape plans submitted. Richard Brooks, landscape contractor of Mathews and Associates, represented the applicant and stated that plants had been consolidated somewhat, but there was actually the same quantity. Concerns were mentioned regarding drainage swale. Fogland stated that asohalt swale would be keeping water away from toe of wall. Wood added that if swale is maintained, it will relieve the drainage problem. Planning and September 13, Page 3 of 7 Zoning Meeting Minutes 1984 Lot 46/47, Block 1, BM @ BC - Chambertin Townhouses - Landscape Plans - Continued from 8/9/84 Special Meeting, Con't. Fogland stated that guardrail fence is 42" high and is wrought iron, which is the same design as was previously in place and that the terraced areas of retaining wall show landscaping to be placed there. Dingwell motioned to approve the landscape plan for Chambertin Townhouses on Lot 46/47, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek as submitted. Kumpost seconded. Passed unanimously. Lot 55, Block 2, BM @ BC - Avon Center - Revised Planting Plan Fogland explained that Commission had requested that plans be more defined and show more appropriately what was intended to be done. The applicant submitted a letter dated September 11, 1984 stating that there was a problem acquiring the previous landscape plan materials and it is their policy to proceed on projects only after they have obtained an estimate of the work to be done. Fogland further explained that the applicant had stated they would proceed with the work immediately once the project is approved. Ned Gwathmey, applicant and representative for Avon Center stated that the revised planting plan is not %s regimented as the previous plan submitted and the variety of plants had been increased. He stated that once they knew the cost, they would like to start immediately. Concerns were mentioned regarding the parking lot and discussion followed. Marty Jones of Planters of Vail and contractor for Avon Center landscape project explained that he drew the plans to scale and the streetscape had been broken up, but only tc give a continuous screen of ground level up to 14'. Jones stated that the materials to be used included deciduous shrubs 3-5' and 24-36" range; evergreen shrubs in the 18-24" range; crabapples in the 8-10' range; pines in the 8-10' range; and spruce trees in the 10-14' range. Jones went on to say that there is a variety of heights and contours with this plan and there is adequate screening of the parking lot without having rows of 14-16' spruce trees and that there would bn a variety of seasonal colors. Dingwell motioned to approve the revised planting plan for Avon Center, Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek with the condition that the triangle area on the plans be reflected as a loading zone and accept the time schedule as immediate. Landauer seconded. Passed unanimously. Lot 55, Block 2, BM @ BC - Co -Development Sion - Avon Center/Peregrine Village Fogland stated that the proposed sign is to be located on the east side of Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. The size of the sign is 34" x 66" at a height of 7'. He explained that in discussions with the applicant, that they verbally agreed to remove the existing development sign located west of Avon Center. Fogland suggested that the Commission may want to consider the use of the words "Now Leasing" on the proposed sign. Planning and September 13, Page 4 of 7 Zoning Meeting Minutes 1984 Lot 55, Block 2, BM @ BC - Co -Development Sign -- Avon Center/Peregrine Village, Cont. Applicant su itted a drawing of the proposed sign with the colors to be used. Maury Daily, applicant and representative for Avon Center and Peregrine stated that the purpose of the sign is to lease commercial space for Avon Center and Peregrine and the intent is to focus on Avon overall and to promote Avon as a future site for commercial activity and bring business into Town with the pro- motion of the Town Center Mall concept. Daily stated that the sign would have a maroon background with cream color lettering. Kumpost motioned to approve the co -development sign for Avon Center/Peregrine Village on Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver with the condition that "Now Leasing" be changed to read "For Information Call". Landauer seconded. Kumpost amended motion to say "Connercial Space Available, For Information Call", and that existing development sign be removed and that approval for proposed sign is not to exceed 2 years. Landauer amended second. Passed unanimously. Lot 5, 6, E 9, Block 5, W.R. - Conceptual Review - Birds of Prey Townhomes Fogland explained that applicant requested a conceptual review for project that effects Lots 5, 6, and 9, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision. Applicant is proposing 2 fiveplex buildings on Lots 5 and 6, and 2 fourplex buildings on Lot 9. Appli- cant has prrposed a vacation of lot lines on Lots 5 and 6 so that project could be locateu' on the site without having to go too far into the hillside. All units are modular type construction and similar in design and platted density is correct. Applicant submitted color rendering and floor plans for review. Jovan Barzelatto, applicant and representative for Birds of Prey project stated that they would like to proceed on working drawings and are looking for feedback from Commission regarding design. Barzelatto further stated that 304:: of project will be built on-site and the rest would be manufactured. Barzelatto explained and reviewed site plans with Commission members. Materials for the roof are shake shingle and the siding type was still being explored. Kumpost and Blair stated for the record that neither of them had a conflii,t of interest with Block 5 in Wildridge Subdivision. Concerns were mentioned about the vacation of lot lines between Lots 5 and 6 with respect to utility easements. Blair stated that he believed that there were none in that area to cause any problem. Landauer suggested that when applicant return for design review, that they include color renderings of both sides of building, materials be to used and how the backside of the building would look. Kumpost motioned to approve the conceptual review as submitted for Birds of Prey Townhomes, Lots 5, 6, and 9, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision for general desion intent. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Planning and September 13, Page 5 of 7 Zoning Meeting Minutes 1984 Lot 63, Block 2, BM @ BC - Peregrine Village - Variance Request - Parking Reduction Wood stated that variance request is for a reduction in parking requirements. He explained that a letter submitted by the applicant dated September 5, 1984 was vague as to what they were actually requesting and that items needed to be better defined. He further explained that there were overlapping issues based on previous approvals which included landscape areas, loading spaces and parking, Wood suggested that the Commission work with the applicant to narrow down the specific request. Rick Larson, applicant and project manager for Peregrine stated that they were looking for advice and direction from the Commission so that they could proceed. He explained that Peregrine is approved for 52,000 S.F. of commercial space and 103 condominium units and that they currently have enough parking. He further stated that interior hallways and some commercial space had been revised to show a net leaseable space of 58,500 S.F. He stated that they did not know what types of services were going into those spaces. Larson said that approval was granted for 52,000 S.F. under Ordinance 79-12, which does not allow for a percentage of compact cars and in order to get that percentage, a variance is needed. Ordinance 79-12 requires 1 space for 400 S.F. and the adopted ordinal;--- allows a 25" re- duction from normal parking requirements for a specific use. The new requirements are 1 space for 250 S.F. of commercial with an allowable reduction of 25Y. Larson stated that by approving the 3255 compact car space on covered spaces, it would allow them 362 car spaces. Blair questioned if Ordinance 79-12 was being used, and if changes were made, would the current ordinance be included. Wood explained that the applicant has the option of requesting a review under the 79-12 Ordinance. The application submitted was not specific. Wood stated that if request is being narrowed down to a variance request for compact cars, it is recommended that Staff and applicant work together. Wood suggested that the Staff report be redone so that it is concise and that proper restrictions are placed on it based on past decisions. Wood further recommended that the public hearing be opened to the public and then recessed so that application could be continued to the next regular meeting. Bill James, Town Manager spoke from the audience and felt the parking variance and related aspects should be carefully studied. Blair stated that clarification was needed and that it would be appropriate to continue the application. Dingwell motioned to continue the variance request for parking requirement reduction for Peregrine Village, Lot 63, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek for additional study and that applicant submit a request for a specific ordinance and specific variance. Kumpost seconded. Discussion followed between Commission and Staff. Motion passed unanimously. Planning and September 13, Page 6 of 7 Zoning Meeting Minutes 1984 Lot 63, Block 2, BM @ BC - S.R.U. - Peregrine Village—Time Share og an state that applicants request was for time a share concept for Peregrine Village. The request is for 103 residential units which is a Special Review Use in the Town Center Zone. He further stated recommendations by Staff to include: 1) may want to approve subject to completion of all requirements of Subdivision Ordinance; 2) successful resolution to parking and open space requirements as mentioned in earlier dealings with this project; and 3) impact of "time sharing" projects on Town services and facilities, i.e., bus service and recreational facilities. (This section was addressed in Subdivision Regulations with Christie Lodge). Greg Gage of Peregrine Properties and applicant stated that they were asking for a Special Review Use approval for time share or fractional fee ownership consisting of 1/4 share, 1/8 and 1/16 share. which Summit County is currently using as a marketing concept. Gage explained that the fractional fee concept is considered as a type of whole unit or multi -ownership. Gage clarified that fractional fee would have 4, 8, or 16 owners rather than 52, and this might have less of an impact on Town services. He further stated that the east tower would be used for fractional fee time share and the recreational facilities include swim spa, Jacuzzis, saunas, and steam rooms in a 2,000 S.F. common area. Kumpost motioned to approve the concept of time share for Peregrine Village, Lot 63, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek subject to resolution of their open space requirements and that the Commission found that they would then be in conformance with items 1-3 of Section 17.20.020, Granting of Special Review Use. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Lots 13-16, Block 2, BM @ BC - Buck Creek Condominiums - Project Development Sign Fogland stated that applicant was requesting an extension of design approval for Phase IV of Buck Creek Condominiums. The first 3 phases.have been built with Phase IV remaining to be built. Design Rules state that design approvals are valid for 2 years unless a building permit is issued and construction pursued. Fogland further explained that the project development sign was approved in 1980 and was valid for 1 year or until all of the units were sold. Several units still remain to be sold. Plans of Buck Creek Condominiums were reviewed by Commission members. Dingwell motioned to approve the project development sign for Buck Creek Condominiums for 2 years only and to also approve the design approval for Buck Creek Condominiums Phase IV for 2 years, located on Lots 13-16, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Donaldson seconded. Passed unanimously, Planning and September 13, Page 7 of 7 Zoning Meeting Minutes 1984 Other Business Landauer rejoined Commission discussion. Kumpost suggested that the next work session include additional information regarding large lot reduction that had previously been submitted by Dick Kvach. Fogland presented a list of goals for the Commission members to review with proposed deadlines included. Blair mentioned enclosed articles of information and interest that he submitted to the Commission members. Reading and Approval of P & Z Minutes of 9/13/84 Regular Meeting Dingwell motioned to approve the minutes of September 13, 1984 with the changes as noted. Kumpost seconded. Passed unanimously. Kumpost stated that page 4 of the minutes, bottom of the page, should include that the Town Council agreed that the Commission look into amending the parking ordinance to possibly amend the section on parking reduction to define what would be included in a large lot reduction and what should be considered in a Special Review Use in order to get the parking reduction. There being no further business to discuss, Kumpost motioned to adjourn the meeting. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 11:00 PM. Respectfully Skb 'tted, `� Margare M. Laci Recordifig Secretary Commission Approval: A5-�Ipplfjcp Date Sgrr Z? i5e¢ - M. Blair P. Cuny J. Davis T. Landa L. Kumpo M. Donal C. Dingw