Loading...
PZC Minutes 012186G` RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 21, 1986 The regular meeting of the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission was held on January 21, 1986 at 6:50 PM in the Town Counci: Chambers of the "town of Avon Municipal Complex, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman 11ike Blair. Members Present: Mike Blair, Cheryl Dingwell, Jeff Maddox Pat Cuny, Charlie Gersbach Members Absent: Tom Landauer, Mark Donaldson Staff Present: Norm Wood, Director of Engineering and Community Development - Jim Williams, Building Administrator - Ray Wright, Engineering Technician - Maggie Lach, Recording Secretary Work Session Wood reviewed agenda items of January 21, 1986 with Commission members. Regular Agenda Items - 7:40 PM Citizen Input - Informal Discussion__7 Wynfield Inn - Lots 73/74, Blk. 2. SM @ SC Wood stated that Wynfield Inn was previously approved on Lots 29 and 32, Block 2. Wynfield has submitted a letter requesting withdrawal of this application due to fact that they are moving proposed development to Lots 73/74, Block 2. Dingwell motioned to accept applicant's request for withdrawal of application for Lots 29 and 32, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Cuny seconded. Passed unanimously. Harvey Champlin, Vice President of Wyrfield Inn stated that they were presented the opportunity to relicate their project to the Savoy Square site, which they are plEased to do. Champlin stated that they were asking for feedback from the Commission. He explained that project must be approved by February 15, 1986 or they would lose bond proceeds and tax exemptions. The steps involved are: on February 28 Council would approve resolution for bond proceeds; Wynfield must have preliminary and final approval by February 4, which would leave them 11 days to transfer bonds to new property. Brad Dodds, architect from Merrick and Company presented site plans for Commission review, along with color renderings. Dodds stated that Lots 73/74 is .28 acres larger than previous site. The building design is the same but straightened an new site to 90 degrees, and the core area has been changed slightly. They have taken the additional acreage and utilized that for landscaping. On previous submittal landscaping was under requirements and now have 25% of site used for landscaping. planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 21, 1986 Page 2 of 8 Citizen Input_- Informal Discussion - Wynfield Inn -_L=ots 73/74 Blk. 2. BM @ BC_ Dodds explained that parking lot has been moved back to State right-of-way boundary and propose some landscaping in that area. The pool is larger and there is more landscaping in that area. Signage for project is 122 square feet. Signs will be located on 3 sides of building and a freestanding siy,i near the street. Signs on the face of the building are appr-o>cim�Ately 3 feet by 11 feet which will be backlit on the nortn, south and east faces of building. the freestanding sign is approximately 3 feet by 10 feet and will be lit. Snow storage has been eliminated somewhat from the back of the site. Wood stated that protection of Buck Creek was of concern. He stated circulation on this site was better than on previous site. West entrance lines -up almost directly with Benchmark Road and makes a good connection. There is a proposed bus stop in front of the project along Beaver Creek Boulevard. The swimming pool is in a much better location and in a more protected area. There are excess Development Rights on this site with 71 Development Rights assigned, and they will use approximately 38. Blair stated that as member of Avon Metropolitan Distract, Buck Creek is source of water supply and do not want that to become contaminated. Dodds stated sand trap filter is incorporated into middle of parking lot to trap oil and gas from parking lot. Wood stated major concern of snow storage is protection of Buck Creek. Maddox felt lite plan was superior to previous plan and building deign fits in better with Breenbriar project than the Savoy Square design. Blair asked Commission if full design review was necessary again for the project because of relocation to adjacent sit-. Cuny stated she would like to see a massing model of the project. Discussion followed. Champlin gave brief overview of Sunroad property and problems involved with site planning. Commission members agreed that full review was not necessary. Blair suggested that Savoy Square submit a letter of withdrawal from Lots 73/74. Champlin asked if there was arty reason why they could not obtain preliminary and final approval at the February 4, 1986 meeting. Chris Riley, resident of Avon spoke from audience and stated he understood pressures of short time frames for approval. Blair thanked Champlin for presentation. Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 21, 1986 Page 3 of 8 Lot. 23 Hlk. 1 (Wolff Warehouse) Special Review Use, - Retail Sales, IC Zone District - Beaver Track & Trail, Inc Cont fromReaular Meeting - Public Hearing Wood explained that action on this application was continued from the December 17, 1985 meeting and the January 7, 1986 meeting to allow applicant to find a resolution to parking shortages on-site for proposed use. At staff's suggestion, owner of site has submitted site plan which shows on-site parking adjacent to Nottingham Road. Proposed plan shows piping of Nottingham Road drainage ditch and paving the area between the edge of the existing pavement and the building. This would result in the addition of 9 parking spaces for a total of 25 spaces on the site. The review of this application has become a Special Review Use, design review and variance request. The Special Review Use is for the proposed uses of retail and service for snowmobiles in the project. The design review is for site plan revisions necessary to meet the required parking requirements for the Special Review Use. The variance is to allow parking within the front 10 feet of the front yard. Wood reviewed staff recommendations for design review, 1-4. Wood explained that the proposed site plan requires a variance from Section 17.24.020 of the Municipal Code, which prohibits parking in the front 10 feet of the required front yarns. Wood then reviewed variance criteria A -D, 1-3, and staff comments, 1-3. He suggested that review be broken down to site plan review, variance review, and Special Review Use. Ricky Fitzsimmons, attorney representing the owner of the building stated that he agreed with most everything in the staff recommendations. He believed that the prop,,sed use for Beaver Track and Trail, Inc. would not be detrimental to any property in the area. He also believed that traffic that did back into the road would not cause any great problems because it is at a dead end street with little traffic. He stated that Wolff would submit a letter of credit guaranteeing construction as soon as weather permits. Blair then re -opened the public hearing. There being no one wishing to be heard, Blair closed the public hearing. Concerns were mentioned of more retail businesses renting space in the warehouse and needing more parking space. Fitzsimmons stated that Wolff has tried to control parking contractually. In all leases it is clear that each tenant is allowed a limited number of spaces. Commission reviewed site plan in relation to parking spaces required. F'lanning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 21, 1986 Page 4 of 8 Lot 23 Bl k. 1, BM @ BC (Wolff Warehouse) Special Review Use Retail Sal•_�, IC Zone District - Beaver Track & Trail, Inc. Con t _from 1/7/86 Reoular Meeting, Con_'_t. Cuny motioned to approve the site plan for the Wolff Warehouse, contingent upon items 1-4 of staff design review comments, and upon approval of variance and Special Review Use. Dingweli seconded. Passed unanimously. Wood stated that variance is to allow parking within the +runt 10 feet of the front yard. Fitzsimmons stated that the need for the variance relates to the Special Review Use and a little more intensiv? use of the building than what it was originally zoned for, thereby requesting a more ntensive use and more parking spaces. He believed it would not present a danger to the health, safety or welfare of other- persons and that backing into the street in this particular instance would be appropriate. Concerns were mentioned of Nottingham Road becoming a through street eventually. Fitzsimmons stated that if traffic patterns were to change significantly or street needed to be widened, the applicant would have to make other arrangements for parking. Patrick Metzdorf+, president of Beaver tract: and Trail, Inc. and applicant stated that the road between the Deli and Avon National Bank has traffic that must back into the street. Cuny felt that proposed parking spaces would never be used; people would chouse the most convenient spot and the parking lot would never be full. Blair reviewed Section 17.36.050 Findings Required A -C, 1-3. Gersbach motioned to approve the variance according to staff comments and because existing projects in this zone have this privilege. Cuny seconded. Gersbach amended motion to include recommendation that applicant have other parking arrangements available if the Town decides to widen Nottingham Road. Cuny amended second. Passed unanimou=_ly. Wood stated that Special Review Use is subject to previous ctions. The project could meet the minimum parking requirements, which was a major problem with the project. Wood Then reviewed Section 17.20.040 A -D, 1-3, Special Review Use Findings Required. Wood then reviewed staff recommendations for Special Review Use, 1-3. He stated that all of these provisions had been incorporated into the Special Review Use approval. Fitzsimmons stated it was clients intention to arrange with Town Attorney a line of credit so construction could begin. Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 21, 1986 Page 5 of 8 Lot 23 Blk 1 BM @ BC (Wolff Warehouse) Special Review Use Retail Sales, IC Zone District - Beaver Track & Trail. Inc. Con t. from 1/7/86 Regular Meeting. Con t. Maddox recommended approval of the Special Review Use after consideration of factors A -D of Section 17.20.040, contingent upon staff recommendations 1-3. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimo"sly. Lot 23 Blk. 1 BM @ BC (Wol•Ff Warehouse) Beaver Track & Trail Inc - Sian Design Review, IC Zone District - Con 't from 1/7/86 Reoular Meetina Ricky Fitzsimmons, attorney representing owner of building stated that it is owners intention to have a sign that fits within the code requirements and the proposed sign will not be practical. Wood stated that application was continued from the December 17, 1985 meeting and the January 7, 1986 meeting. Action on this application was partially dependent upon the Special Review Use request, which would permit Beaver Track and Trail to locate in the project. The proposed 18 square foot sign is over the 12 square feet allowed per individual business in a multiple bus: ess project. This additional 6 square feet could be allowEd through an approved sign program or by committment from the owner of the project to restrict total signage for the project to the maximum allowable. Staff recommends the Commission review the proposed sign on its own merits and approve or disapprove accordingly. Wood reviewed recommended conditions I and 2 of staff report. Fitzsimmons atated that after discussing matter with tenant, that in the event that variance is granted and extra 6 feet were added to Polaris sign, 6 feet would have to be taken off another sign. Wolff's direction is that total square footage for signs for entire project would be below the limits, which are required by zoning ordinance. It is intent to stay within overall size requirements. Wood presented rendering of sign and photos of sign for Commission review. He stated that sign has blue background, white lettering, with yellow star in the "O". Patrick Metzdorff, applicant stated that sign is molded plastic, internally lit, and sign is provioed by Polaris. Sigh would be flush mounted to building at front entrance and dimensions are 3 feet by 6 feet. Dingwell had concerns of warehouse being a multiple use building and that it would be appropriate that owner submit a sign program for the building to maintain consistency. Fitzsimmons stated that this is client's intention and he would ask owner for submittal. Discussion followed on warehouse and sign program. Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 21, 1986 Page 6 of 8 Lot 23 Blk. 1 BM @ BC (Wolff Warehouse) Beaver Track & Trail Inc - Sian Design Review IC Zone District - Con't. from 1/7/86 Regular Meeting, Can't. Metzdorff stated that the only difference he saw was that fact that his sign would be lit and Blue Steel Gun Shop sign is iaot. Blair stated that differences are backlighting and colors. Metzdorff stated that at December 17, 1985 meeting the Commission tabled sign review along with Special Review Use, but in terms of the design of the sign and appearance, it was his understanding that the sign looked great and there would be no problem approving it. Dingwell stated that Commission had time to review this and it is not the design of sign but a problem with continuity of signage on the building. Metzdorff stated that he would like sign approval contingent upon a sign program for the building. Cuny felt sign was too large at 18 square feet. Dingwell agreed with Metzdorff. Metzdorff stated that if present sign is disapproved in any given municipality, Polaris requires the dealer to have a neon sign in the window. Gersbach motioned to approve the sign as submitted with condition that building owner will not allow future signs to exceed maximum requirements. Motion died due to lack of a second. Discussion followed on neon signs. Dingwell motioned to approve the sign as a tempor-ary sign until the owner of the building submits a sign program. Approval is to expire July 1, 1986. Maddox seconded. Passers unanimously. Lot 33 Blk 1 BM @ BC - Barshop Building - Variance Request To Allow Parking within 10 Feet of Nottingham Roam R.O.W. Public Hearing Wright stated that applicant, Peel/Warren Architects, representing owner of Lot 33 has requested a variance to allow parking within 10 feet of the Nottingham Road right-of-way. Kathy Warren, architect and representative of landowner stated that they were proposing to encroach on the 10 foot front setback on Nottingham Road. It is a corner property, therefore it has 2 front setbacks. Due to configuration of lot which is long and narrow, the building is long and narrow and explained that they are 20% under the allowed floor area on the building. In order to get a parking configuration that works well for cars and clear parking lot of snow, the configuration that we came up with encoraches on the front setback. Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 21, 1986 Page 7 of 8 Lot 33Blk 1 BM @ BC - Barshop Building - Variance Request To Allow Parking within 10 Feet of Nottinaham Road R.O.W.. Public Hearing. Can't. Warren explained that there is a curve on Nottingham Road property line and at east end of parking area it is 9 feet away from property line and on west end, 2 feet away from property line. She felt this was a common situation in this particular area. Blair opened public hearing. There being no one wishing to be heard, the public hearing was closed. Wood presented site plans for Commission review and discussion. Dingwell had concerns of 10 foot setbacks being required by the Town and then waiving those requirements. Wood stated that there could be flexibility with this site as opposed to buildings already in existence. Warren stated that zoning was done prior to ordinance. Zoning ordinance changed, therefore the use of the lot is no longer capable of doing what it was planned to do. She explained that owner has kept the size of the building down and is working with the size of the site, and felt that this fits in well in that neighborhood. Commission continued review of site plans. Maddox, observed that the building was being composed on the site and therefore dictating that the site must have a variance. Warren stated they were going with what was economically feasible. Blair reviewed approval criteria, Section 17.36.040 and Section 17.36.050, findings required. Gersbach motioned to approve variance after reviewing staff comments. Cuny seconded. Dingwell asked for explanation of undue hardship in this case. Gersbach stated that it would not be economically feasible to build without the variance. Discussion followed. Motion passed unanimously. Readina and Approval of P & Z Minutes of 1/7/86 Reaular Meeting Maddox motioned to approve the minutes of January 7, 1986 meeting as submitted. Dingwell seconded. Passed unanimously. Planning & Zoning Meeting Minutes January 7, 1986 Page 8 of B Other Business Blair reminded Commission to review Procedures, Rules and Regulations for next meeting. Commission discussed variance applications of January 21, 1986. There being no further business to discuss, Blair adjourned the meeting. Meeting adjourned at 10%55 PM. Respectfully Sub 'tted, Ad ! rg e e M. Lach Record ng Secretary Commission Approval �f�-� Date M. Blair —/0' ��L*�� P. Cuny T. Landa C. Dingwel J. Maddox M. Donalds C. Gersbac