No preview available
PZC Minutes 062785RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINU`1'ES OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JUNE 27, 1985 The regular meeting of the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission was held on June 27, 1985, at 6:30 p.m., in 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: Chairman Mike Blair, Jerry Davis, Pat Cuny, Mark Donaldson, Cheryl Dingwell. Members Charlie Gersbach and Tom Landauer arrived at the end of the work session, in time for the regular meet- ing. Members Absent: None Staff Present: Norm Wood, Director of Engineering/Community Development; Jim Lamont, Town Planner; Bill James, Town Manager; Jim Williams, Building Administra- tor; Ray Wright, Engineering Tech.; Barbara Joseph, Recording Secretary Werk Session Blair called the Work Session to order at 6:40 p.m. Wood gave an overview of the items on the evening agenda. He briefly reviewed the applications, and outlined criteria to be considered during the Commission's evaluation of them. He briefly outlined recommended action, also. Wood informed the Commission that a joint Town Council/Planning and Zoning Commission work session has been scheduled for Tuesday, July 9, 1985, from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. Topics to be discussed include the Master Plan Development District Goals and possibly the Sign Code. Lamont reviewed the Development District 6 Goals, Policies, and Programs. He stated he had attached an additional memo to the Goal statements. This memo evaluated a proposed zone change, for Lots 26, 27, & 28, Block 11 Benchmark :;ubdivision, from a Master Plan standpoint. He specificall;7 addressed Master Plan criteria Planning & Zon.,7 Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 2 as it relates to the proposed Hotel development on the above mentioned lots. Commission members discussed changing the District 6 Goals to allow for this type of development in this area. Dingwell moved to leave the District 6 Goals, Policies, & Programs az they are now. Cuny seconded. Passed unanimously. This recommendation will be passed on to the Town Council at the joint Work Session on July 9th. At this point, the Commission took a two minute recess. Chairman Blair called the regular meeting to order at 7:42 p.m. Citizen Input = LyDda_R9gers _-D2p-9hLRA k-R1aZ-A-Sign Program Linda Rogers, Building Manager for the Benchmark Plaza, approached the Commission. She stated she was requesting the Commission's input, on behalf of two of her tenants, regarding "sandwich board" type signs. It was stated that the present Sign Ordinance allows for this type of sign; the new Sign Ordinance, passed by the P & Z but still awaiting Council adoption, does not allow this type of sign. She stated that she has not prepared an amendment to the Benchmark Comprehensive Sign Program, as yet, and was asking for guidance from the Commission before doing so. Williams stated that, under the current Sign Code, portable signs are allowed as long as they do not exceed 4 S.F. and are only used during business hours. Davis suggested resignage of the building as an alternative. Linda Rogers stated that the building was pretty clDse to the maximum signage allowed, already. Although the current Benchmark Sign Program does not allow "sandwich board" signs, she would be willing to amend the program if the Commission would give its approval. Discussion followed. Linda Rogers stated she would reevaluate the current Benchmark Sign Program, speak with the tenants concerned, and then prepare an amendment for Commission review at a future meeting. Tract P. Block 2, Benchmark at BeaveX_gx-gek - Water Treatment Plant - Pr -e7 ;m; nary-Lonceptual Design$Qyiew Wood passed out site plans and partial landscape plans for the Commission's review. Planning & Zon. .7 Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 3 Blair stated that he sits on the Water Authority Board, but does not see any conflict at this time. Wood stated that the staff was recommending a Conceptual Design Review for the Water Treatment facility proposed for Tract P, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. This was located on the west side of Nottingham Lake, east of Beaver Creek Blvd., next to the north side of the railroad. Wood -tated that Commissioners should keep the additi>nal development, proposed for this same site, in mind when reviewing the Treatment Plant design. This proposed development, the Avon Event Center, would be built along the north side of, and possibly on top of, the Water Treatment Plant. Submittals to date include a Site Plan, showing building location, grading and drainage, existing utilities, and proposed underground pipeline locations; a conceptual landscape plan, floor plans, and elevations of the building. Total square footage of the building and the dimensions have not been indicated, to date. Duane Davis, representing the Upper Eagle Valley Regional Water Authority, addressed the Commission. He presented a colored rendering of the proposed design that showed the South and the West building exposures. He outlined materials proposed for the exterior of the building, and indicated, on the drawing, areas allowed for future expansion. He stated that no landscape plans have been made for the front of the building due to the possibility of additional development. The Water Authority is working with the railroad to identify possible drainage problems, also. The landscaping planned thus far encroaches on the railroad right-of-way, but Davis stated that the railroad has no problem with this, as long as the drainage problems are worked out.. James reviewed the Town's plans in relation to the plans for the Treatment Plant. Be explained how the Town's proposed construction would fit in with the Water Authority's building. Davis stated that, although a Red metal roof and a Gray acrylic exterior are shown for the building, the Water Authority is uncommitted in this area, and would be open to suggestion from the Commission. The applicant was directed to work on a toned -down color scheme, to bring back samples of proposed and alternate colors and samples of the exterior siding material, to work with the staff on submittals for the next meeting they wish to attend, and to address the undersized parking space and drainage problems. The applicant was also directed to address the fact that the parking indicated overlaps into the 10' setback along the lot line. The Planning & Zon_.y Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 a Page 4 parking will have to be moved, or a variance applied for. No action was taken. Lot 51, B14SLcY��lslricly�=fit y Duplex - Final Design Review Cont'd from 6/13/85 Wright introduced the application, stating that Conceptual Design approval had been given at the laet meeting. At that meeting, the applicant was directed to submit a complete grading and drainage plan for the site, to trim the corners of the building where the timbers join together, and to provide more room for turning and maneuvering in front of Unit B. Michael Ray, the applicant, addressed the Commission. He outlined the changes he has made in response to the above concerns, stating that the staff has indicated their satisfaction with them. Wright confirmed this. The staff report accompanying this application stated that a 6 foot high retaining wall is indicated in the design of the new driveway. Wright stated that the structural design of this wall will have to be approved before construction, but felt this could be handled at a staff level. Wright felt that the si•:e and type of materials to be used for the retaining wall should 'ie made known to the Commission. Mr. Ray stated that 6'x 8' timbers would be used, to match the house. As the grade goys down, the height of the wall would go down. He would not be using railroad ties, and did plan to trim the corners off. The timbers would be treated, and stained a wood color. Cuny reminded the applicant that the culvert at the start of the driveway will have to have at least one foot of cover. Donaldson moved Final Design Approval for the Ray Duplex, Lot 51, Block 31 Wildridge Subdivision, with the structural design of the retaining wall to be worked out to the satisfaction of the staff. Davis seconded. Passed unanimously. LD -L§ -2.91-H- 314-4-12� RI — Proposed L4t-Z,_Block 1, Wynfield�iYiSi4�=dlYIIfiEl� inn - Frellminarv--Desigp Review Blair stated that a street right-of-way variance would be considered along with the Preliminary Design Review. Wood passed out site plans. He suggested dealing the the Design Review issues first, on a Conceptual or Preliminary Design Review Planning & Zon..y Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 5 basis. He stated that the project was granted Conceptual approval at the last meeting, subject to a number of concerns being addressed. These items were listed on the staff report, along with staff comment as to how the applicant has addressed each one. Carl Pickett, representing the Wynfield Inns, addressed the Commission. He stated that staff had indicated that the Administration Building setback had not been designated. He stated that the setback will be 251, and it was their intention to move the Administration. Building behind the 25' setback. They have deleted the apartment of the building to accommodate this. They have also increased the recreational facilities, in response to concerns of the Town Planner. He briefly outlined their planned facilities. He stated he hoped to have all modifications incorporated into the plans in time for Final Review. He indicated their intent to connect their development to future and existing developments with walkways. They will have a sidewalk along Beaver Creek Blvd., also. Dingwell inquired about plans for curbs and gutters. Wood stated that the applicant has indicated curb and gutter around the building, and on the building side of the parking lot, blit not around the exterior of the parking lot. Dingwell felt the developer should be required to provide curb and gutter around the entire parking lot. Pickett presented and reviewed a model of the building that the Commission had requested be provided. Wood had indicated a problem with the square footage of signage shown for the building; Pickett stated this would be looked in to. He stated they have discarded plans for a proposed free-standing sign, and stated they were now going to limit signage to building signs and a small entry sign. He stated that color and material samples for the signs would be provided for review. Architect Bill Pierce, representing the owners of the Lodge at Avon, approached the Commission to express strong disappointment over the design of the proposed Wynfield Inn. Their concerns included the placement of the building on the site, the relation of the building to its adjacent sites, and the architectural quality of the building. Pierce felt the design of this building would set a new low standard in design quality, and felt the building was not appropriate for its location in downtown Avon. He felt that he center of town deserved a top of the line, high quality building, especially from a company with a reputation for quality developments. He reiterated his strong opposition to this building design being approved as it is now. Lamont discussed a trip to the 4 -Seasons Hotel, in Colorado Planning & Zon_._:y Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 6 Springs, which is run by the company developing the Wynfield Inn. He had attached a memo, to the staff report, evaluating the Wynfield Inn proposal from a Master clan standpoint. He discussed this memo, and the Master Plan criteria that should be considered during this Preliminary Design Review, at length. He felt the architecture could use some work, and strongly recommended that the State Highway Department be requested to formally respond to a request for a road cut on Avon Road. Pickett then requested a copy of the staff report and the Planner's memo. He felt that the access through the building could be a problem in terms of the hotel operations. Donaldson felt that the possibility of going higher with the building should be explored. Andy Beck, representing Aircoa, stated that there were cosi constraints that had to be taken into consideration; the cost-effectiveness of this project is important to them. Commission members felt that the building could be made more interesting, without great expense, and felt that the pedestrian access issue was an important one and needed to be addressed. Cuny felt that color/material alternatives should be explored. Blair stated that the applicant needs to respond to the concerns of Commission members, staff, and the Town Planner. Landauer moved to continue the Preliminary Design Review for Lots 29 through 32, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Donaldson seconded. Passed unanimously. Lots 29 - 32. Block 2 , Benchmark at Beaver Creek - Proposed Lot Block 1, Wynfield Subdivision - Wynfield Inn - Variance Request Wood stated that the applicant in this case is the owner of Lots 29-32, not Aircoa or Wynfield Inns. He stated that this was a request for a variance, from Subdivision Regulation 16.40.060, to reduce the required right-of-wdy width, of the proposed Wynfield Place, from 50 feet to 40 feet. The variance request was accompanied by a sketch showing revisions to the Preliminary Plat that change Wynfield Place, from a through street, to a street starting at W. Beaver Creek Blvd. and ending in a cul-de-sac. Wood stated that the Town Council has referred this matter to the Planning and Zoning Commission for its recommendation on the variance request and on the Preliminary Plat revisions. This was not a public hearing. Wood reviewed the criteria under which a variance may be granted, as per Section 16.12.020 of the Municipal Code. He stated that Planning & Zon__.9 Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 7 the valiance request issue should be kept separate from the Plat revisions, and recommended that the variance be considered as if no revisions to the Plat had been made. He outlined three questions, specifically related to the variance request, that should be answered: 1. Has the developer shown undue hardship that would result from a 50 foot right-of-way width requirement? 2. Has the developer shown that the granting of the requested variance is not materially important, in a planning sense, to the orderly, controlled development of the tract in question? 3. Has the developer shown that the granting of the requested variance will not adversely affect the use of the land in the immediate area of the tract in question? Blair noted that the applicant was not represented at this meeting, and asked what the staff's comments were regarding this variance request. Wood outlined staff comments, that were also included in the staff report. The staff felt that the grantirg of this variance request could result in a number of negative impacts directly related to each of the above three questions. In summary, staff felt that no undue hardship exists, that the requested variance is important in a planning sense, and that the requested variance could adversely affect the use of land in the immediate area. Gersbach moved to recommend denial of the variance request to reduce the required right-of-way width for Wynfielu Piace, to the Town Council, based upon staff comments. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. The related issues of the Wynfield Place cul-de-sac, and the other Preliminary Plat revisions, were next considered by the Commission. Wood stated that, before the revisions were made, this Preliminary Plat had been recommended for approval to the Town Council, subject to certain conditions. Wood reviewed that portion of the staff report dealing with this matter. He stated that another revision shown, that could prove to be critical, was the relocation of the northerly line of existing Lot 30. If left as currently shown, this could preclude access from Avon Road to proposed Lot 1 (existing Lot 29), due to Federal Highway Department restrictions. Blair felt that a cul-de-sac at the proposed location would create problems, especially as far as traffic circulation and emergency vehicle access were concerned. Planning & Zon_.y Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 8 Wood stated that the cul-de-sac would serve no purpose other than access to a lot that already has an access. Cuny moved to recommend that the Town Council deny approval of the amendments to the Preliminary Plat for Wynfield Subdivison, Lots 29 through 32, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, based upon staff comments. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously Lot 51, Block 1. BenChmAlk it Beaver Creek - Public_ driri9 - Proposed Zone Change Donaldson and Gersbach stepped down, due to conflict of interest. Wood stated that the owner of Lot 51, Block 11 Benchmark at Beaver Creek, has requested a change in zoning, from Residential Medium Density (RMD), to Residential High Density and Commercial (RHDC). If approved, this change would be accomplished through adoption, by the Town Council, of an ordinance amending the Town Zone District Map. Wood outlined the generally residential -type uses allowed in the RMD zone, and stated that the same uses were allowed under RHDC zoning, as well as hotels, lodges, motels, retail shops, showrooms (except motorized vehicles), restaurants, service shops, offices, accessory buildings, and auto service stations. He summarized other differences between the two Zone Districts in terms of Average Allowed Density (RMD=7.5 units per acre/RHDC=25 units per acre), and Maximum Building Height (RMD=60'/RHDC=801). Architect Victor Mark. Donaldson, representing the lot owner, J. Kent Mueller, M.D., addressed the Commission. He stated he was before the Commission for input, and hoped to make clear the origins of the requested zone change. He stated that they consider the lot a unique location. Due to its proximity to a major thoroughfare, leading to two major subdivision developments, and encouraged by the direction the Master Plan process has taken, they feel that the lot is a transitional use area, and that the proposed zone change would benefit the neighboring residents as well as the overall Master Plan process. They have requested a change to RHDC, instead of an SPA zone, because the owner of the lot is not actively pursuing development at this time. Donaldson distributed a graphic design he had prepared, illustrating potential development on the site. He clarified the exact location of the of the lot for Commission members as they reviewed his drawings. He emphasized the fact that the drawings did not represent any proposed project, they were merely to Planning & Zon..y Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 9 illustrate possible use of the site and to give some idea as to the scale of the lot, building heights, etc. He stated the lot is accessable from both Buck Creek and Nottingham Roads, and identified the parcel of land between Lot 51 and Buck Creek Road as Tract AA, the result of a recent Replat. Tract AA, owned by Benchmark Companies, is currently zoned OLD (Open Space, Landscaping, and Drainage). Benchmark has indicated some support for the consideration of some form of transitional zoning for Lot 51. Blair opened the meeting for public hearing, stating that the required notices had been posted and adjacent and affected property owners notified. A number of area residents, and representatives of neighboring condo Owners Associations, expressed strong opposition to any zone change for Lot 51. A letter, received by the Town. Clerk's office on June 24, 1985, was referenced in the discussion. This letter, signed by 22 Avon homeowners, sited the considerable amounts of money invested, by the homeowners, to maintain the residential atmosphere and property values of their neighborhood; the "serious detriment" to their investments posed by the substantial increase in density allowed under the proposed zoning; and the "overabundance" of commercial space and commercially --zoned areas currently available in Avon as major factors in their opposition. Blair closed the public hearing, thanking the residents for their comments. Lamont reviewed a memo he had prepared, dated June 24, 1985, that outlined the Master Plan criteria issues applicatle to the consideration of the requested zone change. Davis felt the site could potentially be: considered transitional in nature, but could not support a change to RHDC. Landauer agreed. Cuny felt the area should stay residential, stating there are not enough areas to build houses in as it is. Donaldson stated that, since the Development District containing this particular lot is to oe discussed at the upcoming joint Work Session, he would request that the matter be tabled or continued, until after that Work Session, to allow time to consider amending or withdrawing their application. The homeowners wanted the matter settled, and did not want to see it continued. Cuny moved to recommend that the Town Council deny the requested zone change, for Lot 51, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, based upon the effect the requested change would have on the density in the area, and the precedent she felt would be set by the change. Planning & Zon_ .7 Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 10 Landauer seconded. Dingwell, Landauer, and Cuny voted "aye". Davis voted "nay". The motion carried by a 3 to 1 vote. Lot A, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek - Junior Village in Avon Center - Special Review Use - Public Hearina Williams introduced the application, stating that the Junior Village Day Care Center/Pre-School, owned by Heler. Hochstetter, was approved by Resolution No. 83-38, contingent upon the location, final design, and landscaping of the outside play area being approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The owner has applied for approval to move the play area, from the east end of the Avon Center building, to an area defined by a foundation wall, the Avon Center building, and the parking deck. The new area is approximately 2,100 S.F. Helen Hochstetter briefly reviewed the history of Junior Village, and stated she felt the proposed playground location was vastly superior to the location previously approved by the Commission. She submitted a rough illustration of the proposed play area, indicating landscape materials and play equipment, for the Commission's review. Blair opened the public hearing. As there was no one present wishing to be heard, Blair closed the public hearing. Williams stated that, with the proper screening and fencing, he felt the site was an appropriate one. Hochstetter stated there would be fence all the way around the playground. They are proposing a 6' cyclone fence around areas adjacent to the construction site, and split -rail fence, with invisible mesh along the bottom portion, around the rest of the area. Davis felt a detailed layout for the site should be provided, to have something to refer back to if things were not completed as approved. Hochstetter stated the State requires a minimum of 1,500 S.F. be provided in an outside play area. Landauer moved to approve the Special Review Use to relocate the outside play area of the Junior Village Day Care Center/Pre-School, Lot A, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, with the condition that the types, sizes, and locations of the landscaping materials be illustrated on a simple drawing and, on the same drawing, that wording be provided indicating the types and locations of play equipment and the fence location and materials. It was also stipulated that the work be completed no more than 30 days from the date of approval. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Planning & Zon ..j Meetij.g Minutes June 27, 1.985 Page 11 A. Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek - P Williams introduced the application, stating that the Commission had approved a neon sign until June 21, 1985. The Avon'Center Comprehensive Sign Program requires that all variances to the Sign Program be approved by the Commission. Buck Letourneau, with the Penalty Box, stated that the Commission had directed him to get a letter of approval from the owner of Avon Center, which he has done. He stated it is the same sign, in the same location. It was stated that this was not an amendment to the Avon Center Sign Program, just a variance from the Sign Program criteria. Brief discussion followed. Landauer moved to approve the sign for the Penalty Box Restaurant, Lot A, Block 2, Benchmar" t Beaver Creek. Davis seconded. Passed unanimously. Lot 23, Block -IL Benchmark at Beaver Creek - Blue_,5teel Gun Shop in the Wolff Warehouse Building_Sign -Design Review Williams reviewed the staff report, stating the application was for two signs. One was proposed for directly over the store entrance, one was proposed for the south end of the building. Each sign would be 15 S.F. (3'h x 5'1 each). Jerry Galle, President of the Blue Steel Gun Shop, addressed the Commission. He stated the background of each sign would be Yellow, and the lettering would be Brown and Orange. Discussion followed. Dingwell had a problem with the proposed colors. Galle stated the sign backing would be painted exterior plywood, with painted, raised plastic letters. He stated the colors would not be harsh, but would consider other colors if the Commission so desired. Gersbach suggested allowing one 12 S.F. sign, to comply with the Sign Code. Galle stated he had chosen 3' x 5' because of the size of the building. Davis suggested allowing one 3' x 5' (15 S.F.) sign. Discussion followed. Davis moved to allow one 15 S.F. sign to be Berge and Brown in color, at the suggestion of the applicant, for the Blue Steel Gun Shop, Lot 23, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Landauer seconded. Passed unanimously. Planning & Zon ..y Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 11 Lot A, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek - Penalty Box Restaurant in Avon Center -_Sign - Design Review Williams introduced the application, stating that the Commission had approved a neon sign until June 21, 1985. The Avon'Center Comprehensive Sign Program requires that all variances to the Sign Program be approved by the Commission. Buck Letourneau, with the Penalty Box, stated that the Commission had directed him to get a letter of approval from the owner of Avon Center, which he has done. He stated it is the same sign, in the same location. It was stated that this was not an amendment to the Avon Center Sign Program, just a variance from the Sign Program criteria. Brief discussion followed. Landauer moved to approve the sign for the Penalty Box Restaurant, Lot A, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Davis seconded. Passed unanimously. Lot 23, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek - Blue--ateel Gun Shoo in the Wolff Warehouse Building - Sign - Desitin Review Williams reviewed the staff report, stating the application was for two signs. One was proposed for directly over the store entrance, one was proposed for the south end of the building. Each sign would be 15 S.F. (31h x 511 each). Jerry Galle, President of the Blue Steel Gun Shop, addressed the Commission. He stated the background of each sign would be Yellow, and the lettering would be Brown and Orange. Discussion followed. Dingwell had a problem with the proposed colors. Galle stated the sign backing would be painted exterior plywood, with painted, raised plastic letters. He stated the colors would not be harsh, but would consider other colors if the Commission so desired. Gersbach suggested allowing one 12 S.F. sign, to comply with the Sign Code. Galle stated hs had chosen 3' x 5' because of the size of the building. Davis suggested allowing one 3' x 5' (15 S.F.) sign. Discussion followed. Davis moved to allow one 15 S.F. sign to be Beige and Brown in color, at the suggestion of the applicant, for the Blue Steel Gun Shop, Lot 23, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Landauer seconded. Passed unanimously. Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes June 27, 1985 Page 12 • Other Business ® Dingwell asked if an7one remembered approving Red 11indow accents for the Pizza But, when the Red roof was approved. Williams stated he had already locked into the matter, and it appeared it had been approved. He stated he would research the qW matter further, to be sure. Landauer stated that, since this was Commission member Davis' last meeting, he would like to thank Davis for all his input and work while serving on the Commission. Wood stated that Jeff Maddox had been appointed, by the Town Council, to fill the position previously held by Davis effective July 11 1985. Cuny stated she would be absent from the next meeting so she could attend her husband's high school reunion. �. i Landauer moved to approve the minutes of the May 38, 1985, regular meeting. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. E Planning & Zon June 27, 1985 Page 13 .y Meeting Minutes There being no further business tc come before the Commission, Dingwell motioned to adjourn. Cuny seconded. The meeting was adjourned, by Chairman Mike Blair, at 11:36 p.m. ectf 1 Su mitted B r ara o6e Recording Secretary Commiss M. Blai P. Cuny J. Davi T. LarJauer� ! � C. Dingwell M. Donaldson C. Gersbach ate