PZC Packet 080189-Is
August 1, 1989
Lot 8, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Request for Unit Increase Without
Development Right
The Commission denied the request for an increase in unit size without an
additional development right, citing non-conformance with the zoning code as
justification.
L2
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
August 1, 1989
Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Christie Lodge Owners Association
Christie Lodge Pool and Enclosure
Conceptual Design Review
INTRODUCTION
The Christie Lodge Owners Association has applied for
conceptual design review for a swimming pool and enclosure.
The enclosure will feature a removable roof and side
curtains. The proposed pool and enclosure would be located
in the northwest corner of the Christie Lodge site near the
intersection of Avon Road and I-70.
A variance has been granted for the pool enclosure to
encroach into setbacks along Avon Road and I-70.
Schematic drawing showing the proposed pool layout and the
enclosing structure have been submitted. The applicant
requests approval of the pool location so that excavation for
the pool and relocation of utility lines can commence.
Request for approval of the pool enclosure is subject to the
submission of final design documents.
STAFF COMMENTS
Before acting the Commission shall consider the following
items in reviewing the design of a proposed project:
6.11 - The conformance with the Zoning Code and other
applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon.
Comment: Approval of the setback variance brings
the project into conformance with applicable rules and
regulations.
6.12 - The suitability of the improvement, including type and
quality of materials of which it is to be constructed and the
site upon which it is to be located.
Comment: The type and quality of materials are
compatible with the existing structure which the proposed
project abuts.
6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site
impacts to adjacent properties.
Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 1989
Page 2 of 3
Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek.
Christie Lodge Owners Association
Christie Lodge Pool and Enclosure
Ccnceptual Design Review
Comment: The adjacent properties are public road
rights -of -ways and the proposed project has no impact. The
location of utilities and drainage have been altered with no
deleterious effect on adjacent rights -of -ways. Views from
adjacent properties will not be affected.
6.14 - The compatibility of proposed improvements with site
topography.
Comment: No significant alteration of topography
is proposed. Drainage is sufficient.
6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as
viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public
waus.
Comment: The visual appearance of the pool and
enclosure does not pose any deleterious effects from adjacent
and neignboring properties and public ways. A screening
fence will be constructed along Avon Road. A similar fence
is already existing along the I-70 right-of-way.
6.16 - The objective that no improvement be so similar or
dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values. monetary or
aesthetic will be impaired.
Comment: The improvement is recreational in nature
as well as common to hotel and condominium uses in the
vicinity. The design of the pool enclosure is compatible
with the aesthetic of the pre-existing structure which it
will abut. No values, monetary or aesthetic will be
impaired.
6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements
with the adopted Goals, Policies and programs for the Town of
Avon.
Comment:. The proposal is in general conformance
with adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of
Avon.
r�
Sta°f Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Auguact 1, 1989
Page .3 of 3
Lot 25, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Christie Lodge Owners Association
Christie Lodge Pool and Enclosure
Conceptual Design Review
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The excavation for the pool and relocation of utilities
should proceed according to the following conditions:
Subject to the submission of exterior materials,
including the roof and side panels of the F)ol enclosure.
Subject to the submission of final architectural
drawings, including fence design and landscaping schedule.
Subject to submission of zoning information
regarding site coverage and open space.
The project may proceed to construction, subject to
final design review approval.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Introduce Application (Staff);
2. Presentation by Applicant;
3. Staff Comments;
5. Commission Review - No Action to be Taken on
Conceptual Review
Respectfully submitted,
J arhel. F .
The Commission tabled this item until the August 15, 1989 meeting, when
the applicant will provide more information on the design of the enclosure.
r-
s
r
a
04
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
August 1, 1989
Lots 65/66, Block 2, Benchmark
The Annex Shopping Center
Retail Shops and General Sign
Design Review
INTRODUCTION
at Beaver Creek
Program
The owner, Otis Company of Colorado, is in application of a
sign program for the Annex Shopping Center. The sign program
proposes a project sign and individual tenant signs.
STAFF COMMENTS
Before acting the Commission shall consider the following
items in reviewing proposed designs:
A. The suitability of the improvements, including
materials with which the sign is to be constructed and the
site upon which it is to be located.
Comment: The durability of High Density Foam for
lettering on freestanding sign, if accessible by the public,
may be prone to damage.
B. The nature of adjacent and neighboring
improvements.
Comment: The general concept OT the various
elements of the sign program are consistent with the nature
of adjacent and neighboring improvements.
C. The quality of the materials to be utilized to
any proposed improvement.
Comment: Application does not provide a landscape
plan for the proposed freestanding sign.
D. The visual impact of any proposed improvement
as viewed from any adjacent or neighboring property.
Comment: The application does not provide a
location plan for proposed signs. Visual impact on adjacent
or neighboring property cannot be accurately determined. The
type of sign being proposed, if lighting intensity of surface
mounted pan -channel sign is appropriate, should not present
any problems for adjacent or neighboring property.
Application information does not include lighting proposal
for freestanding sign.
0*4
Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 1989
Page 2 of 4
Lots 65/66, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
The Annex Shopping Center
Retail Shcps and General Sign Program
Design Review
E. The objective that no improvement will be so
similar or dissimilar to other signs in the vicinity that
values, monetary or aesthetic, will be impaired.
Comment: Sign program is similar to other signs in
the vicinity.
F. Whether the type, height, size. and/or quantity
of signs generally complies with the sign code, and are
appropriate for the project.
Comment: Application does not contain sufficient
information to determine the height, size, and/or quantity of
signs to determine if the sign program complies with the sign
code.
G. Whether sign is primarily oriented to
vehicular or pedestrian traffic, and whether the sign is
appropriate for the determined orientation.
Comment: Conceptually the sign program appears to
locate sign for the determined orientation. The application
does not contain sufficient information to verify the
determined orientation of all proposed sign for either
vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS: Sign programs shall be in
accordance with:
1. Sign programs shall be compatib;e with the site
and building, and should provide for a similarity of types,
sizes, styles, and materials for signs within a project.
Several alternatives for signage should be included in the
program so as not to be so restrictive as to eliminate
individuality.
Comment: Application does not indicate if sign
alternatives are possible so as not to eliminate
individuality.
2. Sign programs may be proposed or changed only
by the owners of the building or the owners association.
Sign program changes or proposals may not be made by an
00%
Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 1989
Page 3 of 4
Lots 65/66, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
The Annex Shopping Center
Retail ::hops and General Sign Program
Design Review
individual business.
3. Proposed signs, not in accordance with an
approved sign program, will only be considered by the
Planning and Zoning Commission upon receipt or written
evidence that the proposed sign is acceptable to the owners
of the building or the owners association.
4. All sign programs shall be in written and plan
form. Plans shall indicate size, location, type, and number
of signs for the site and buildings.
Comment: The application contains insufficient
written and plan information to specifically determine size,
location, type, and number of signs for the site and
building.
5. Program may include limitations on wording,
colors, design, lighting, materials, and other restrictions,
as deemed appropriate by the applicant.
Comment: The application contains ro such
limitations other than lighting, and materials.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The sign program application does not contain sufficient
information to determine the adequacy of the sign program.
The application should be continued until such time as the
requisite information is submitted for review.
Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
August 1, 1989
Page 4 of 4
Lots 65/66, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
The Annex Shopping Center
Retail Shops and General Sign Program
Design Review
RECOMMENDED ACTION
1. Introduce Application (Staff);
2. Presentation by Applicant;
3. Staff Comments;
5. Commission Review - Action
Respectfully submitted,
James F. Lamont
PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION
Approved as Submitted ( ✓ ) Approved with Recommended
Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( )
Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( /1n')
Date 0-1-09 Denise Hill, Secretary at z
The Commission approved the Annex Sign Program as presented.
August 1, 1989
Lot 41, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
Single Family Residence
Conceptual Design Review
The Commission tabled this item until sufficient information is received
to complete the application.
L.:
C�
aw