PZC Minutes 020690RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
MINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING
FEBRUARY 6, 1990
The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was
held on February 6, 1990, at 7:35 PM 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 Frank Doll.
Members Present: Frank Doll, John Perkins,
Jack Hunn, Terri Jeppson
Denise Hill, Buz Reynolds
Staff Present: Rick Pylman, Director of Community
Development,
Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary
Chairman Doll, at roll call noted that all members, except
Clayton McRory were present.
Lot 4 Filing 1 Ea lebend Subdivision South Harbor
Development Setback Variance Request Public Hearing
The two above described items were postponed until later in
the meeting to allow time for a representative of the
applicant to arrive.
Conceptual Discussion Lots 87 and 89. Block t,_ Wildri_dge
Subdivision Fractionalized Project, 8 Units Per Lot, Total
16 Units Continued From January 16, 1990
Rick Pylman provided plans for each lot and described the
locations of both lots and the access to the lots.
Pylman stated that there are four units in each building,
eight units per lot. They are separate buildings. They are
mirror image buildings, with metal roof, and a total of four
covered parking spaces and the balance of the parking is
surface parking. He stated that the parking on Lot 87
should be considered, along with the mirror image appearance
of each building and the separation of the buildings on each
lot, and the roof and the thoughts of the Commission on the
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
February 6, 1990
Page 2 of 9
conceptual Discussion Lots 87 and 89. Block 1 Wildridge
Subdivision Fractionalized Project 8 Units Per Lot. Total
16 Units, continued from—lL16L90,_cont_
fractionalization proposal.
Ken Sortland stated that the project is designed for
affordable housing. He stated that there is not much detail
at this time as he is here for ,lust some comments regarding
the proposed project. He stated that the project is designed
to make it marketable.
Denise Hill asked what the total square footage of each unit
would be.
Sortland stated that there would be two bedroom units of 800
square feet, and a two or three bedroom unit of 1200 square
feet and studio units of 450 square feet. There will be a
mix.
Hill asked if the project could be designed not as mirror
images. She stated that she has a hard time with four mirror
image buildings.
Sortland stated that they are trying to build them
economically, and he has different interior designs, but the
exteriors change very little.
Terri Jeppson stated she is uncomfortable with the steel
roof.
Sortland stated that it is designed to look like a tiled roof
and he will have a sample of it the ne-:t time he comes in.
Jeppson asked what he plans to sell the units for.
Sortland stated that there is not an exact price at this time
as he is still working on some of the costs.
Jeppson stated that she was also concerned about
fractionalization.
John Perkins stated that he feels the fractionalization issue
needs to be resolved. Also, the Board has in the past
discouraged detached structures. He would like to see some
sort of attachment. He also has a concern about the mirror
image of the design. He stated that conceptually he would
like to see more imagination at the initial concept.
Jack Hunn echoed some of the comments already made regarding
Planning and zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
February 6, 1990
Page 3 of 9
the fractionalization, detached structures, and mirror image.
He is also concerned about an inadequate number of covered
parking spaces. He feels they should strive to achieve more
covered parking spaces. He stated that he has a problem with
a metal roof. He stated that if these are to be rentals,
they lack storage, also common amenities such as laundry.
Sortland stated that every two units has a laundry in the
entry area. He stated also that because of the roof slope
there would be quite a bit of storage space.
Hunn stated that he was concerned about the design and in
particular with the metal roof problem and the snow shedding
right to the front door and to the garage door.
Hunn suggested rotating the buildings so that they are not
parallel with each other.
Sortland stated that there are some problems with that.
Others feel that they will be more marketable as detached
units. The setbacks pose a problem as far as rearranging the
buildings.
Buz Reynolds echoed the above described concerns. He
inquired as to :he type of synthetic stucco to be used.
Discussion followed on this matter.
Chairman Doll stated that the applicant might consider
stair -stepping the units. He then reiterated the previous
comments of the Commission members and he recommended that
the applicant get away from the mirror image.
Discussion followed on fractionalization.
Rick Pylman commented on the regulations for
fractionalization and the fact that there is no different
regulation for Wildridge at this time. Fractionalization is
approved in conjunction with the final design review
approval.
4s this was a conceptual design review, no action was taken.
Rick Pylman stated that Lot 3 is a small lot that is located
Planning and zoning
February 6, 1990
Page 4 of 9
Commission Meeting Minutes
Lot 3. Block 3 Benchmark at Beaver CrGwk, Conc@Rtual Design
Review, cont.
to the south of the Sunridge Condominiums, on the corner of
Highway 6 and West Beaver Creek Blvd. He pointed out on the
map the location of the lot. He stated that the access to
the lot is off West Beaver Creek Blvd. He stated that this
is a commercial proposal. The lot is zoned RHDC and has no
residential rights. There is no residential use proposed for
this project. He stated that there are two building
footprints, one with a small convenience atore, with some
other retail space, a couple gas pumps, the second building
contains a restaurant and some leasable spaces, with a second
floor for office spaces. He described the circulation on the
plats. He also described the elevations, with the western
facade in front and the garage bays in the back. He reviewed
a summary stating: The zoning is RHDC; Building Height
allowed is 80 feet, propos d is 25 feet; Building Coverage is
21.6%; Usable Open Space 78%; 8,340 square feet of first
floor space and 4350 square feet for second floor office
space; They have provided 34 parking spaces, required is 30.
Pylman stated his first concern is that RHDC allows uz�es more
in a retail nature and he is concerned with the garage spaces
in the back. He cautioned the applicant to be careful about
the uses that go into the building. The second concern is
the architectural style of the adjacent properties, and the
third concern is the amount of paving.
Steve Riden, representative of the applicant, stated that tie
smaller building would be a convenience store, liquor store
and gas station type of thing with the management office
above it. The second building would be the smaller
commercial spaces and the offices above that would support
the leasable space below. The anticipation is to have a
telephone store, a lubrication shop and Back Country Guide
and Limousine Services would occupy some of the spaces, and
there would be a diner style small restaurant at the end.
Basically this project is intended for loc.ls use.
Part of the design concept is to use a split level access for
the large bays in the back so that a large front is not shown
to the Sunridge project. The roof confriguration is pretty
conceptual at this point. They would like to provide as much
landscaping as possible and at the same time keep the right
amount of circulation. They have also had some discussions
with Sunridge about possibly adding additional landscaping on
their property to help mask the back of the building, and
also to provide walkways from their property to the
commercial property. They are considering reducing the size
of the second building by about two lease spaces and
Planning and Zoning
February 6, 1990
Page 5 of 9
Commission Meeting Minutes
Lot 3 Block 3. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Conceptual Design
Review, cont.
providing more parking and landscaping. Materials would
probably be wood siding and a low reflective metal roof.
Buz Reynolds asked about the roof line on the north
elevation. He stated that he felt that the landscaping on
the north elevation, facing Sunridge, is very important.
Terri Jeppson stated that her concern was also Sunridge, and
she would like to see the use of evergreens along that side
rather than aspen. Another concern is the limousine service
and the matter that there may be too many vehicles in an
already busy corridor.
Riden stated that there may be only a couple cars there,
basically it will be their office. It will not be a storage
area for all their cars.
Discussion followed on the zone district and what is allowed.
Jack Hunn stated that he has some concerns about some of the
uses, i.e. all the garage spaces provided and the fact that
they will become automotive service related businesses and a
lot of automobiles will be stored there.
Riden stated that the concept is that they want to provide a
space for the tenants to service their vehicles, i. e. the
telephone store needs a place to install the phones in cars.
He stated that the concept is that the local will drop t.ie
car off for services and then pick it up.
Hunn stated that he didn't think the long vehicles could get
out of those garages. He also stated that there is a market
for all of the services suggested and the he thinks that they
will find that they are too successful and he feels the site
is too tight for all of the proposed services.
Denise Hill stated she liked the country store dea. She had
some concerns regarding the circulation.
John Perkins stated that he did not particularly care for the
western look. It is not compatible with the country store
look and neither are compatible with the surrounding areas.
He suggested that, architecturally, they should look at the
direction they are going. He stated that he didn't think the
site plan will work once the setbacks are met. He thinks
there are too many uses for the site.
Planning and Zoning
February 6, 1990
Page 6 o' 9
� A-,
Commission Meeting Minutes
Lot 3, Block 3 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Conceptual Design
Review. cont.
Chairman Doll stated that the main concern is that it is too
busy. "-here also needs to be considerable work done on the
north side to keep from offending the sunridge residents that
will be racing the garage doors. The western facade is not
appropriate for the area.
As this was a conceptual design review, no formal action was
taken at this time.
Lot 71, Block 2, Ben chmark,at Beaver Creek, Conceptual Design
Review
Rick Pylman stated that this property is the lot between
Beaver Liquors building and the Commercial Federal building.
He stated the lot is about a half an acre in size. There is
a 25' front setback with a 10' requirement for parking. The
building coverages is about seven and a half thousand square
feet. They've met the 20% minimum open space requirement.
They have almost eleven thousand square feet of landscaping
proposed; parking requirement is met at 30 spaces; one
loading berth and a little over 2,000 square feet of snow
storage. Pylman then showed a rendering of the site plan.
Pylman pointed out an access that is to be shared with Buck
Creek Plaza Building. He stated that the scale and style of
architecture seems appropriate for the area. He has concerns
regarding the ability of parking to function appropriately;
the lack of pedestrian access, both along the front of the
property, and from the street to the store fronts; and the
presentation of the property to the street.
Mark Donaldson, representing Bruce Allen, stated that they
are anticipating the possible one-way street and that is why
they have this building in the "L" shape so they can get as
much store front exposure as possible. The spaces will be
sold off. They are willing to install sidewalks along the
front property line. He stated that there are some
variations that could be provided regarding the parking
spaces. Keep in mind though that there are two accesses to
the site.
Jack Hunn stated that he hes no problem with the concept of
the building, but he is concerned with the metal roof
shedding snow onto the walkways. Hunn asked about the coior
of the roo .
Donaldson stated that it would be a subtle, matt finish, a
medium grey or green. They still need to do some color
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
February 6, 1990
Page 7 of 9
Lot 71 Block 2. Benchmark at -Beaver Creek Conceptual Design
Review, cont.
studies.
Hunn stated that he shared Pylman's concern about the
parking.
Discussion followed on the location of the trash enclosure.
Also, further discussed was the possibility of walkways in
the area.
Denise Hill stated her concern was also sidewalks and the row
of parking at the front of the building is another concern.
John Perkins echoed all the previous concerns. He stated
that his only concern with the architecture is the gable
ends.
Buz Reynolds questioned the access for delivery trucks.
Donaldson stated that the loading and unloading will all be
done in the front doors of the retail spaces.
Terri Jeppson also voiced concerns regarding the walkways and
she also commented that she feels the parking area is very
tight and very forced. She stated that she would also like
to see more landscaping.
Chairman Doll reiterated the above mentioned concerns of
parking, sidewalks, circulation pattern and roof color.
Since this was a conceptual design review, no action was
taken.
Rick Pylman stated that Jim Comeford, who represents a group
that is developing a building called Avon Towne Square which
will be located on the Lodge at Avon site, is present to
introduce himself and discuss the project which will be
coming in for review at a later date.
Chairman Dolt commented on the article in the paper regarding
the project.
Jim Comerford stated that he basically, was here this evening
to ask for Some direction on signage for the site.
He stated that it would be a commercial center with retail
facilities, and office spaces.
Planning and Zoning
February 6, 1990
Page 8 of 9
Commission Meeting Minutes
He asked for some direction regarding a temporary sign for
marketing purposes. The will oe asking for a variance from
the allowed 16 square foot sign at the next regular meeting
of the Commission He stated that the developer has done a
mockup of a graphic sign that is an 8 x 16 sign. He stated
that since the property sets so far back from Avon Road the
larger sign will be needed. A 16 square foot sign does not
allow for a graphic sign.
The Commission asked that a .olor rendering be provided
showing what the applicant has in mind. Considerable
discussion followed on the requested size. The Commission
stated that they would not consider a sign that large.
Rick Pylman stated that he will make a site visit to
determine what size sign will be appropriate for that site
and will have a recommendation for the Commission and
applicant by the next regular meeting. The Commission took
no action on this matter at this time.
Lot 4 Filing 1 Eaglebend Subdivision. Final Design Review
Since no representative was present regarding the above
described items, John Perkins moved to continue them to the
next regular meeting on February 20, 1990.
Buz Reynolds seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Jack Hunn moved to approve the minutes of the 1/16/90 meeting
as submitted.
John Perkins seconded.
The motion carried unanimously.
Other Business
Considerable discussion followed on fractionalization and
Wildridge.
Jack Hunn commented the big purple bus parked at 51 Beaver
Creek Place. Fick Pylman stated that he will check into it.
Rick Pylman suggested the Commission do a group site visit
for the up coming items. The Commission decided to meet at 4
p.m. on February 20th.
Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
February 6, 1990
Page 9 of 9
John Perkins moved to adjourn
Denise Hill seconded.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Charlette Pascuzzi
Recording Secretary