Loading...
PZC Minutes 061990oma 01'40 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING JUNE 19, 1990 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on June 19, 1990, at 7:30 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, Buz Reynolds Jack Hunn, Terri Jeppson Clayton McRory, John Perkins Staff Present: Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development, Jim Curnutte, Planner Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording :secretary Chairman Doll, at roll call noted that all members, except Sue Railton were present. Lot 23 Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Wolff Warehouse,_ Review of Parking Requirements for New Use Jim Curnutte stated that retail sales had been approved previously for the Blue Steel Gun Shop in this building. He stated that one of the conditions of the original approval was that any proposed change in the occupancy or use within the project shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Dar, Shelton, of Vail Furniture, is planning on using the space for storage and retail sales of used and discontinued furniture. It will be called the Bargain Barn. A sign review is scheduled for the future. Curnutte then reviewed the parking requirements fc this use. He stated that half will be warehouse and half will be retail. Therefore, the minimum number of parking spaces is seven. Curnutte stated that he had just received a letter from Mr. Wolff stating that they are allowing seven parking spaces for the furniture business and storage facility. Considerable discussion followed on the previous parking problems with this project. The Commission felt that they needed more information from Mr. Wolff regarding the other leases for the building and how many parking spaces are allocated to each lessee. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 2 of 24 Perkins moved to table Lot 23, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek to such a time that the owner of the property, Mr. Wolff, will meet with the staff and provide copies of the existing leases for the staff's review and determination if the parking is available. Terri Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Lot 7, Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Duplex Final Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that Michael Hazard is present representing Dave Garton. The proposal is to construct a Duplex residence on Lot 7. The property was originally approved for six dwelling units. In the early 80's the first phase was constructed (Suncrest Townhomes). The project was condominiumized and a lot line was created to the east of the three units in order the three units to be sold separately. This left, basically, the east half of Lot 7 vacant and this is the property under consideration. The property is approved for three development rights and the applicant is proposing to construct a duplex on the property. The parcel is slightly under a half an acre or 21,000 square feet. The building coverage is approximately 5,000 square feet. The floor area of the building is about 8,000 square feet for a building area ratio of 24% and a floor area ratio of 38%. Nearly 1/2 of the lot area is covered with impervious materials. Maximum building height is 47 feet above finished grade to the peak of the highest ridgeline. The house is about thirty feet from the west property line and is over sixty feet from any existing structure. A landscape plan is provided, but dDes not list quantities. Curnutt•� stated that only one copy of the latest version of the site plan had been provided. The building is a three story, wood frame building with gable roofs. Exterior building materials include wood siding, stucco, and machine cut cedar shingles. Curnutte stated that this proposal is in conformance with all Avon zoning regulations. The type and quality of both building and landscaping materials are suitable with Town guidelines. The siting of the building and the landscaping appears to be sympathetic to the adjacent residential property. r4kra, Pt`W PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 3 of 24 Lot 7 Block 1, Wildridae Subdivision Duplex,_ Final Des_n. Review, continued The building has been designed to "step down" with the slope of the hillside and appears to work well with the existing topography, with the exception, due to the length of the common hallway, it has forced the eastern half of the duplex to overhang the edge. The appearance from neighboring properties seems to be acceptable, but the portion that hangs over the ridge will be highly visable from the public ways. Curnutte stated that Staff recommends approval with the condition that a more detailed drainage and grading plan is provided and also quantities listed in the landscaping plan, and the applicant should consider some ways to lessen the impacts of the portion of the building which overhangs the steep part of the lot. Michael Hazard addressed the matter of the overhang by stating that they have been considering stepping down the deck. He then reviewed the colors and materials as shown on the list provided. Perkins stated that at the previous discussion of this project, he had suggested that a model be provided. He asked if the applicant had done that. Mr. Hazard stated that he had not. Perkins stated he had a hard time reading the drawings. He feels that they are a little bit below the level that they usually see for a final design. A model would be helpful as to how this steps down the hill and also how the roof plains come together. Considerable discussion followed on the levels of the building, and the fact that there :teems to be a single car garage for one unit and no covered parking for the second unit and most of the parking is surface. Discussion followed on the F)ssible use of landscaping to breakup some of the use of asphalt. Discussion followed o.i the lack of detail on the plans, i.e. soffits, roof plans, and the complete blank wall, and the lack of detail regarding the fireplaces. Snow management was a concern also. There is a valley feeding a deck and a roof plain feeding a hip that drops on the stairs. Further discussion followed on the matter of the one car garage. John Perkins moved to table Lot 7, Block 1, W.1dridge Subdivision, to give the applicant time to proviGe a greater level of detail in respect to the elevations, so the building plains read clearer. He recommended that a model be made I N + N PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES ,lune 19, 1990 Page 4 of 24 Lot 7 Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Duplex Final Design Review, continued available, or a minimum of a roof plan, specifying all roof plains and pitches. That the applicant look at providing a full two car garage; a more detailed landscape plan with respect to the landscaping adjacent to the building; a treatment of the underside of the overhanging deck and the stepping down of the deck. Buz Reynolds seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Rick Pylman stated that as this is a Special Review Use it will be a public hearing. He described the project as being a sixteen unit fractionalized project. Two eight unit buildings. The site has eight development rights assigned to it. As it was designed, both buildings were to have eight 800 square foot units. When the first building was completed and they went through the subdivision process it was discovered that the units were slightly over built. Twenty-six square feet is the largest error and ten feet the smallest. Out of the eight units, six are over 800 square feet. What this does to the project is put them over their assigned development rights and creates a nonconformance of the zoning. He stated that the developers of Sonnen Halde have secured two development rights and are requesting to transfer those on to the site to make up for the shortfall. Th: development rights are coming from Tract B, Block 1, Filing 2 of Eaglebend. Pylman reviewed the criteria for granting a special review use. He stated that the use of this property is residential and will continue to be residential and the use of the sending property is residential and that will continue to be residential and approval of this request will not impact these uses. He stated that the density of the property would not be changed, only the number of development rights. The proposed use is not changed and therefore, is compatible with surrounding land uses. Staff recommends approval of this request. PLANNING AND ZONING June 19, 1990 Page 5 of 24 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 8 Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek,_ Sonnen Halde, glebend Filinn 2, Public_ Hearing, continued John Dunham, representing Sonnen Halde, stated that they were requesting approval of this request. Chairman Doll then opened the public hearing. With no comments from the public forthcoming, Chairman Doll then closed the public hearing. Clayton McRory moved to grant approval for the transfer of two residential development rights from Tract B, Eaglebend Filing 2, to Lot 8, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Sonnen Halde, as described in Resolution 90-6. Jack Hurn seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Clayton McRory asked what the progress was on the east foundation. Mr. Dunham stated they would start on this project as soon as the last three units are sold, hopefully, this summer. The concern was having another abandoned foundation in town. Jim Curnutte stated that there are really two issues to be discussed and feels that they should be separated. First is awnings as a design review and also about signage. Jan Chenault, owner of Casa Bella, is requesting approval of the awnings and signage on the awnings. Curnutte stated that one of the awnings would be located above the middle tier windows on the west end of the building. The awning is necessary to protect merchandise from sun exposure and reduce cooling costs. The awning is proposed to be blue fabric and would project about foot or so from the building face. It is about 5 feet high and the distance is 58 feet. The second awning is proposed to be above the new door and will be 4 x 8 and project about 4 feet from the building face. Regarding signage, Curnutte statad that he had provided copies of the originally approved comprehensive sign plan for the building and the first and only amendment to the sign plan. This amendment was for adding wording related to the occupant of that end of the building to allow for additional signage for that particular tenant, wits, condition that they PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 6 of 24 must lease more than 15% of the total rentable area of the entire building. This tenant does not meet this requirement. Curnutte stated that the original program provided specific criteria for signs. This proposal does not meet these specifications. Curnutte stated that none of the existing signs on the building meet this criteria. The signs being proposed are 15" white fabric letters to be mounted on the awnings. He did not receive any information regarding illumination of tl.-4 signs. The sign area on the west end sign is approximately 14 square feet, and the south side sign would be about 14-1/2 square feet. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria, stating that awning signs have been used to advertise other retail businesses in town. However, all the signs on this building are internally lit box signs. He stated that the Benchmark Shopping Center signs consist of 3 x 6 end 3 x 8 rectangular tube frames with canvas. The Christie Lodge building does have an awning sign. The quality of the materials proposed do appear to be accertable with the Town sign guidelines, however, the prcposed materials are not authorized in the existing sign program. The impact of the west end sign is magnified by its ,jroposed placement on such a large background. It would make it appear to be larger than 14 square feet. It would also give the impression that Casa Bella owned the entire building, thereby creating the appearance of imbalance in the tenant distribution throughout the building. If the applicant wants the awning for functional or aesthetic reasons, then staff would feel more comfortable if no one tenant were allowed to display signage on that awning. Curnutte stated it is difficult to determine the impact on the value on surrounding properties. To comply with the sign code, the proposed sign must comply with the approved sign program for this building. However, none of the signs on the building comply. The sign program could be amended. At this time the amended sign program received recently is not acceptable. Curnutte suggested the Commission discuss what signage would be acceptable and if they wish to approve it, do so with the condition that the sign program be amended within a specific time limit. Jan Chenault stated that she needs signage and feels that the space that they are using needs the awning for protection of ."*, �N PLANNING AND ZONING June 19, 1990 Page 7 of 24 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES the merchandise. She stated she was open for suggestions from the Commission. She stated that they are sub -leasing from Avon National Bank and is having trouble getting anything out of the management of the building. Chairman Doll stated that he would like to recommend to the Commission that they approve what they are asking for and put a condition on the approval that the manager of the building viork with the staff and come up with an approved sign program �. thin 60 days. Hunn stated that he is uncomfortable with the architectural image of an awning on the west end of the building. This end of the building is architecturally very bold with a lot of repetition in the windows and certain patterns and stacking and to interupt all of that with an awning does the building with an injustice. He stated there are a lot of methods for managing the solar gain without putting an awning up. He suggested applying a film on the interior of the windows that would cut down up to 60% of the solar gain through the windows. Ms. Chenault stated that she is aware of that application, however, her lease states she is not allowed to use this method. F' stated that he would be comfortable with approving the over the door tonight and imposing the condition of bringing the sign program in within sixty days, but encouraged her to look at other solutions to manage the heat gain. Several suggestions regarding the revisions of the sign program were discussed. Perkins stated that he agreed with Jack Hunn. He feels that they will not need the signage around the end of the building. McRory stated he had no problem with the awning on the front. He doesn't feel it would make it any worse than it already is. Signage for a new business is a tough issue. He feels that they need to be sympathetic to new business's needs. Jeppson stated that she would like to see the staff approve the color. Reynolds st&ted he would not mind going with the awning, but. he wants to see the sign program brought back in. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 8 of 24 r Perkins moved to grant final design review approval as presented for the awning and signage on the south side of the building and deny final approval for the awning and signage as presented '`or the west side of the building and that the approval be conditional upon the owners of the Benchmark Plaza building presenting a revised and acceptable signage program for the entire building to the staff within sixty days. Also, Staff shall grant final approval of the color sample. Jeppson seconded. The motion parried with Clayton McRory voting nay. Jack Hunn and Buz Reaynolds stepped down as voting members of the Commission due to conflicts of interest. Jim Curnutte stated that there are three files to be considered this evening. They are the SPA amendment, the Fractionalization, and the Design Review. He stated that the fractionalization of this project has to be approved in conjunction with the design review. The final design review cannot be approved until the SPA amendment is approved. The previously approved SPA for this area is considerably different from this proposal, therefore the need to amend the SPA. The type of use and density as far as number of people on the property is currently approved, but in a different configuration. This SPA amendment will allow them to spread the density out across the property in a different manner. The biggest change being that the old plan called for a nine story, ninety unit structure on the property. The applicants would like to vacate all the existing interior lot lines. At present there are 10 lots and Tract A. Currently there are 139 development rights assigned to the property. Upon vacating the interior lot lines, the total acreage will be slightly over 9 acres. The amount of open spa(-- is going to be reduced. The current plan shows approximately 51% of the property as -pen space, although the staff has not verified this. The applicants are proposing to adjust the existing property line of Tract A. This is to accomplish a more efficient layout of the buildings and parking. Based on the recommendations from the Town Staff, the Commission, and the applicants on-site management consultants, the applicants have agreed to show a community building on the property. This would serve the recreational PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 9 of 24 Lots 2 - 12 and Tract A, Block 1. Eaglebend Filing 41. Eaglebend Apartments SPA Amendment, Public Hearing, continued needs of the residents and possibly provide some day care facilities. The most significant change, in addition to the community building, is the addition of an entrance into the project off of Stonebridge Drive. Currently no topographic, drainage or grading plans have been received. Staff suggested criteria for considering an SPA Amendment. 1. That the proposed amendment is consistent with the efficient development and preservation of the entire SPA. This amendment does significantly charge the densities, the building coverage, the layout, the open space, site parking, etc. of the approved SPA. 2. That the proposed amendment does not affect in a substantially adverse manner either the enjoyment of the land abutting upon or across the street from the SPA or the public interest. Staff does not feel that this amendment would have any adverse impact on private or public properties, however, the full impacts could not be ascertained at the time of writing this report. Because of that, Staff is recommending tabling this ite-n for two weeks. However, Staff feels that the Commission should , at this time, discuss the new layout. Chairman Doll stated that the Commission would consider the SPA Amendment at this time. Arthur Wise, the architect for the project, described how the project will be layed out and where the parking will be located. Every unit will have one covered parking space. All others will be open. They have revised the drawing and have worked on the color scheme. He then provided information on the colors and the building materials. He then discussed the stepping of the buildings. He then described the dumpster enclosures and locations. He stated that now they have gone to one building type with two, three bedroom units. Chairman Doll stated that, regarding the SPA Amendment, they will not be looking at the design. What they need to look at is the reapportioning of the density across the property, the vacating of all interior lot lines, that the open space has been decreased from the previously approved SPA, and to Id -.o , PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTS June 19, 1990 Page 10 of 24 continued adjust the existing bourjary lines of Tract A. The community building and the added eentrance also need to be considered. Perkins asked Staff how strongly they feel that they need more time to study this SPA Amendment? Rick Pylman stated that the SPA Amendment is very closely related to the design review. The SPA plan becomes the development plan. The design review approval becomes the SPA plan. He stated that if the Commission could give that a very good review and they think that the only things that they need to come back with, specifically on design review, might be colors or roof materials, things that won't substantially change the site plan of the project, he feels that they could approve it. Then things that need to move on to council can move on. He suggested that it be done conditional upon the final design review approval Perkins commented on his suggestion of breaking up the checkerboard hard alignment of the building layout. The applicant replied that they had looked at this, but there was no way to do it and maintain the number of units they have. Curnutte stated that they had discussed this and the layout is dictated by the way the water and sewer lines run through the property. Further discussion followed on this matter. Jeppson stated that she was glad to see the community building and the day care facility. She asked about the size of the day care facility. The applicant stated that this would be based on finding an operator and the economic viability of doing it. What they have done is provide a place to put if it becomes a necessity. Discussion followed on the other recreational areas. The applicant feels that the recreational areas are best where they are located, because they wanted more open space around the area. Jeppson asked what the difference was between the open space, before and now. Rick Pylman stated that this has not been calculated at this time, however the previous approval was for a nine story building with two floors of parking, so the open space was much greater. McRory stated that he felt the best thing about the project is the location. It is very suitable for this project. He suggested a way of softening the project would be with more landscaping. Some discussion followed on the proposed PLANNING AND ZONING June 19, 1990 Page 11 of 24 continued landscaping. COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Discussion followed on how many buildings would be in Phase I, II, and III and at what phase the community building will be built. Chairman Doll stated he would be comfortable with the approval of the SPA on the condition that all the rest of the applications are approved. Rick Pylman stated that there are two issues to be addressed through the SPA discussions. They are: 1. Tract A and its reconfiguration and the zone designation of uses on Tract A; 2. The commitment to the community building and square footage of the building. The applicant replied that they have square foot building. The level construction, they see the need 1 -or i they need a solid commitment that community building will be built as Phase III, etc. This has to be Amendment. budgeted for a 2,000 of commitment as to t. Pylman stated that a 2,000 square foot a part of Phase II or included i n the SPA John Perkins moved to grant approval for the SPA Amendment for Lots 2 - 12 and Tact A, Filing 4, Eaglebend Subdivision, with the following conditions: 1. The physical boundaries of Tract A be defined with the Staff. 2. The zone designations of Tract A be confirmed with the Staff. 3. A firm commitment to a minimum 2,000 square foot communit; building be made and the timing of that commitment be in Phase II or no later than Phase III. 4. The project receive all additional approvals required by the Town of Avon. McRory seconded. The motion car ;ed with Jeppson voting nay. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 11 of 24 Pylman stated that the Commission should discuss the fractionalization and the design review concurrently. Curnutte stated that there are 20 buildings, 12 units each. There are 80 units which are under 600 square feet or 1/3 of a development right; 120 units are between 600 and 800 square feet or 1/2 of a development right; and 40 units between 80000 and 1200 square feet or 3/4 of a development right, for a total of 117 development rights used. There are 139 development rights assigned to the property, therefore, they are not using the total amount of development rights. Curnutte reviewed the criteria, stating that the access on and off the property appears to be adequate and the Town's driveway/entrance standards will be met. Regarding the need for public transportation, Curnutte stated that at full occupancy it is possible the project will house well over 400 people and services will most likely be necessary. At this time there is no transportation to the property, but the applicants are showing two locations for future bus stops. Curnutte stated that this project will have an impact on public and private services. The applicant is proposing to mitigate some of the impacts by providing outside recreation and opportunities for public transportacion when necessary. Unit sizes and unit mix is compatible with existing and potential development in the vicinity. Staff recommendation is for approval of the fractionalization request contingent upon the approval of the final design review. Jeff Spanel stated, regarding the fractionalization, that they need to add one more fractionalized unit for the managers unit. They would like to put one or two apartments on the second floor of the community building. Since they have additional development rights the Commission saw no problem with this. Discussion followed on the design review and the fact that new plans had just been received and have not been reviewed by Town Staff, therefore this should be a conceptual review. Curnutte reviewed the building, floor, parking and open space areas. He stated that the maximum height of the buildings is PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 13 of 24 approximately 44 feet from finished grade to the peak of the ridgeline. He stated that the proposed buildings are three story wood frame buildings with pitched roofs. Exterior materials will be prefinished hardboard lap siding painted two different shades of grey. Window trim will be white. Roof materials will be charcoal grey fiberglass shingles. There are three access drives proposed, two from Eaglebend Drive and one from StoneUridge Drive. All parking lots and sidewalks will be either asphalt or concrete. There is a minimum of 410 parking spaces required. The applicant are proposing 410 parking spaces, 240 spaces will be covered and 170 spaces will be uncovered surface parking. A landscape plan has been provided. There will be an irrigation system. Curnutte stated that no information on the community building has been received. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria for design review, commenting that since this design and layout is different than the originally approved SPA plan design review approval can only be granted in conjunction with the SPA Amendment approval. The type and quality of both building and landscaping materials are suitable with Town guidelines. The siting and landscaping of the buildings appears to be sympathetic to adjacent properties. Buildings have been stepped down in height as they approach the river and have been set back from the edge to preserve the natural character of the river riparian zone. A wood fence is proposed to be installed along the west side. He stated that there is no problem with the topography, although they have not received a detailed drainage and grading plan. The appearance of the improvements as viewed from neighboring properties and public ways seems acceptable. Muted colors and landscaping will help to breakup the massing. Although different than the existing buildings in the area, it would not appear that the architecture will substantially impair the monetary or aesthetic values of the surrounding area. The applicant is in conformance with the policies and guidelines of the Riverfront District.. Curnutte stated that the staff recommendation is for more detailed information be provided before Staff can recommend approval. Chairman Doll then opened the public hearing He asked staff if there had been any calls or correspondence PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 14 of 24 Lots 2 - 12 and Tract A Block 1 Eaglebend Filing 4. Eaglebend Apartments Fractionalization Public Hearing, and Design Review, continued received. Staff stated that no calls or correspondence had been received. Doll asked if there were any public comments to be made. With none forth coming he closed the public hearing. Discussion followed on the elevations of the buildings. Perkins was concerned with the wing walls. Discussion followed on the access entries into the buildings. Skylights are being used in the stairwells. All entrances are covered. Discussion followed on the colors to be used. Considerable discussion followed on all aspects of the new proposed plans. Due to several conversations being conducted at the same time, these dicussions are not clear. Doll asked if there was any public comment on the fractionalization or the SPA. Being none the Commission proceeded. Jeppson moved to grant approval of the fractionalization of development rights for Lots 2-12 and Tract A, Filing 4, Eaglebend Subdivision as presented. Perkins seconded. The motion carried unanimously. McRory moved to grant final design review approval with the conditions that the applicant return with the specs on the community building at the second phase of the development and that the staff give a final technical site plan review. Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Jack Hunn and Buz Reynolds returned as voting members of the Commission. nq. Pylman stated that the Grand on Avon Partnership , is requesting a variance to allow a built structure to encroach within six inches of the property and to allow parking within ten feet of the front property line. The previous approval did have parking in the setback, so there really isn't any change. Pylman then reviewed the criteria for approval of a variance. He stated that this type of feature, a defined entry, is essential to the operational needs of the residential units. He stated that if it were new DLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Dage 13 of 24 Lot 63 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Grand on Avon, Variance Request Public Hearing continued construction there would be no need for a variance, however, this building presents a hardship in working a solution to the lack of entry. Pylman stated that the encroachment of the Porte cochere to within six inches of the Benchmark Road right-of-way line will be an impact on traffic. The applicant will be required to realign the road to the center of the right-of-way and construct that road to acceptable standards. Pylman stated that Staff recommends approval of the variance. Mark Donaldson described what could be done with the road and landscaping. Chairman Doll opened the hearing for public comment. He asked if there had been any calls or letters. Pylman stated that no letters or calls had been received. Chairman Doll then closed the public hearing. Discussion followed on the possible traffic problems. Discussion, followed on the realignment proposed. Discussion followed on srow storage. Jack Hunn moved to adopt Resolution 90-7 and that the variance would be warranted because there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the varia.ice that does not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. John Perkins seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Pylman stated that Grand on Avon is requesting approval for several exterior changes to the existing building. Due to too much noise, Mr. Pylman's opening comments are not clear. Mr. Pylman stated that they also have a sign program request that has not been addressed in this staff report and suggested that the design review be done and then the sign program be discussed. Mr. Pylman reviewed the changes in the parking lots, stating that they are driven by the addition of the porte cochere and the revised circulation require: to allow it to function properly. He also discussed the fenestration changes on the west end of the buildin_. He stated there are a couple -"N 'AN PLANNING AND ZONING June 19, 1990 Page 16 of 24 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES things that they are not quite comfortable with yet and they are working with Mr. Donaldson on them. They are the west end parking and the two accesses off of Benchmark Road. These need to be addressed by the Town Engineer. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Condition approval of parking and access upon Town Engineer approval. 2. Request a detailed landscape plan. Mark Donaldson described the retaining walls and landscape around the porte cochere. He stated that the insides of all the exposed exterior corridors and balconys will be a tuscany color, 3 parts white, one part. tuscany. The balance of the exterior stucco is the tuscany color with one part white, two parts tuscany. The accent color for the cap flashing, the roof edges and metal roof color and running trim will be a 22 C (bright blue) out of the Devoe catalog. Reynolds stated he felt that the trim color would be an extreme color difference. It will really stand out. Donaldson stated that they are trying to give a little life to the project. Discussion followed on how much of the building would have this color. The window trims would not have this cclor. Due to several conversations being conducted at the same time, some of this discussion is not clear. Jeppson voiced concerns of clashing with other projects in the area. Hunn stated that he felt that the ramped access is an improvement, however, he is uncomfortable with the design images proposed in terms of the tower elements and the roof form over the porte cochere. He suggested battering the towers along the sides as well as the front plain. He felt that the roof form doesn't have much strength and suggested that by eliminating the stucco portion of the side wall it might be strengthend. Considerable discussion followed on this idea. Donaldson stated that basically what they want to do is finish the building, not rebuild it. Perkins stated he agreed with Jack Hunn. He feels simpler, stronger forms would be less expensive to build. Discussion followed on this matter. Donaldson stated he was willing to use a hip roof form on the structure, even though he didn't like it. Considerable discussion followed. Due to other conversations being londucted at the same time, the discussion on the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 17 of 24 parking lots is not clear. Rick Pylman stated he would like to come back to the Commission with the west parking lot, the accesses, and Lhe landscape plan. Reynolds stated that he would like to see a color rendering of just how much of the bluish teal colcr will be used on trim. Donaldson stated he would provide that. Hunn stated he is not comfortable with the colors. The Commission suggested something softer. Donaldson stated that they would be back with samples of the colors. Jack Hunn moved to grant final design approval to Lot 63, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Grand on Avon,with the following conditions: 1. That this approval excludes fivil civil engineering and the design of the intersections of the parking access with the Town of Avon road and the parking lot on the Town of Avon property. 2. This approval excludes final landscaping and signage. 3. The roof form over the porte cochere be modified as discussed at the meeting. 4. The final colors of the building be presented during a site visit to the Commission and tonights approval excludes final colors. Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. The sign program was then discussed. Pylman stated that this is a conceptual review. He stated that as this is a very large building, there is a lot of signage to be considered. Pylman provided sketches showing proposed locations for signage. There are building identification signs, and retail signs, some directory kiosks, and traffic signs, etc. The applicant is asking for some immediate approval for some identification of the building. This would be a temporary sign (banner). It is six feet high and sixty feet long and says the Grand on Avon and has a phone number. It would be located between the towers on one of the balconies. Considerable discussion followed on the size and the matter of having the phone number on it. Discussion followed on the length of time the banner would be on. Suggestions were given regarding smaller signs and information signs around A%41 iofts PLANNING AND ZONING June 19, 1990 Page 18 of 24 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES the building. The applicant stated that the sign has been changed to six feet by forty feet. Pylman described the proposed signs and their locations as shown on the sketches. Considerable discussion followed on the identification sign location. As this was a conceptual design review, no action was taken at this time. Lots 67 68 Block 21 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Cites Market_ Final Design Review Rick Pylman presented this application, reviewing the Staff report and criteria. Mark Donaldson then made a presentation to the Commission. The above comments were taken from written notes, as no recording was made of this portion of the meeting. John Perkins moved to grant approval of final design review with the following conditions: That secondary doors be installed in fire exit quarters of the living units; final approval of curb and gutter by the Town Engineer; add 5 choke cherries around each of the retaining walls on the north side of the parking lot. Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Rick Pylman stated that the proposed sign program consists of two City Market logos, one on the west elevation and one on the northern elevation. The signs are 151 square feet each. There is a grouping of six department indenitfication signs. The lettering of these signs will be 18 inches, for a total of 162 square feet, making the total signage requested at 484 square feet. The total lineal footage of the building is 544 feet, so this proposal is within the sign code limitations. Pylman then reviewed the criteria, stating that the number of the signs are fine, the locations and materials are fine, but the signange could be reduced and still present an effective indentity to the building. PLANNING 'AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 19 of 24 Mark Donaldson stated that he did not have the liberty to compromis on the sizes. Discussion followed on the letter sizes for the department identifications. It was suggested that the City Market sign on the north be pulled down away from the parapet wall as the other sign. John Perkins moved to grant final approval to the City Market Sign Program with the revision of the six specialty item signs being dropped from 18 inches to 12 inches, and would be compressed both vertically and horizontally, and that the north elevation City Market logo be spaced the same distance from the top of the parapet wall. McRory seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Rick Pylman stated this project has final design approval as one building. At the last meeting the applicant requested a change by separating the car wash from the main building and also asked for a change in the roofing materials. The request to separate the car wash was denied and the asphalt roof was approved with the condition that the applic-nt bring back a sample. The applicant is present with the Sample and also has another revision attempting to separate the car wash. Pylman stated that the staff has reviewed anc' has no functional problems with the site plans and the separation of the two builCings. Pylman described the traffic flow and landscaping. Liscussion followed. Steve Riden stat.•: -1 that they had added a separate entrance and exit for the car wash. He stated that the distances between the buildings is due to the potential in the futi -e for subdividing the property. The second reason is that they intend to proceed immediately with the car wash building. He stated that they have discussed working with the Town of Avon and the State Highway Department and incorporating some landscaping into the right-of-ways but they do not have the permits at this time. Riden also stated that this change gives them more space for the restaurant, which is a criteria for the tenant. They now have the entire building leased. He stated that they will also be presenting an engineered drainage plan to the Town Engineer. J] 0 s ft i 'I, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 20 of 24 Riden then presented the asphalt roofing sample. He stated that it is a 240 lb fiberglass/asphalt composite roof. It has a class A fire rating. It has a 35 year warranty. Considerable discussion followed regarding the roofing. Discussion followed on the proposed revisions to the plan. Discussion followed on the possibility of the third building being built and where it would be located. Discussion followed on the landscaping along the property line at Sunridge. Discussion followed on placing a sidewalk along the west property line. Discussion followed on the facts that there is no difference in the building shapes, the direction of the dumpster has changed and it will be enclosed, landscaping and sidewalk along the west side of the property line, lighting will be at the entry points and a couple on site and the buildings will be lighted. Reynolds moved to approve the revisions of Lot 3, Block 3, Berchmark at Beaver Creek, to the design review with the addition of the sidewalk along the west property line that will be split on both sides of the property line and that the curb between the car wash and the main building be approved by staff. McRory seconded. The motion carried with Perkins and Hunn voting nay. Rick Pylman stated the applicant is requesting to transfer one development right from Lot 87 to Lot 89, Block 1, Wildridge. This requires a pecial Review Use and a SPA Amendment. He then wishes to fractionalize the five development rights that would be on Lot 89 into six units, four 1200 square foot units, and two 1800 square foot units. He is also asking for design review approval for the project. Pylman stated the SPA Amendment should be handled first. He stated that there are two criteria to be considered. He stated that this amendment is consistent with the efficient development and presentation of the Wildridge Specially Planned Area. The proposed amendment does not affect the land abutting upon or across the street from the SPA or the public interest. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 21 of 24 Pylman stated that Lot 87 is more difficult, to develop than Lot 89, therefore, this would help Lot 87. Staff recommendation is for approv;-�:l of the SPA Amendment. Chairman Doll opened the public hearing and asked if there had been any correspondence or calls regarding this item. Pylman stated that there had not been any response. Chairman Doll then closed the public hearing. Hunn moved to adopt Resolution 90-8 to allow the SPA amendment for Lot 87 and 89, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision as submitted. Reynolds seconded. The motion carried unanimously. W R toLot 89Block 1. W.R Public Hearing Pylman stated the Special Review Use requires a public hearing also. He reviewed the criteria for approval of a Special Review Use. He stated that staff recommendation is for approval. Chairman Doll opened the public hearing and asked if there had been any comments from the public. Pylman stated that there had not been any. Doll then closed the public hearing. Jack Hunn moved to approve the Special Review use to transfer one development right from Lot 87 to Lot 89, Block 1, Wildridge, as presented. Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Hearing Pylman stated that the applicant is requesting fractionalization of the five development rights now assigned to this lot. The development plan has four 1200 square foct units and two 1800 square foot units. The five developmert rights will create six units. Py -man then reviewed the criteria for fractionalization approval. He stated there were four development rights and now five and the six units will not impact to the access off the main road onto th*s one. The addition of this one unit has a minimal impact upon PLANNING AND ZONING June 19, 1990 Page 22 cf 24 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES the total density of the Wildridge Subdiv;sion. The issue of public transportation service is a greater issue which will be addressed in the future. The concept of fractionalization could create substantial impacts upon the Wildridge street system, however, this particular project has very little indentifiable impact. The unit size and mix of this project is compatible with the character of the neighborhoos and with the Wildridge SPA. Staff recommendation is for approval. The project appears to meet or exceed the criteria for fractionalization. Ken Sortland stated the reason for the fractionalization is to provide units not in the higher end of the scale, but not at the lower end either. Chairman Doll opened the public hearing and asked if there had been any comments received. Pylman stated there had been none. Chairman Doll then closed the public hearing. Hunn asked what the intent was for the lot that now has three development rights. Sortland stated that no determination has been made as to what would actually be built there. Possibly three single family homes or a small fractionalized project. Buz Reynolds moved to approve the fractionalization of Lot 89, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision. McRory seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Rick Pylman described the project, stating that the buildings cover 17% of the site, are a maximum height of 30 feet and are served by 16 parking spaces, eight of which are covered. There is one access drive onto the site, 18 feet in width, a project indentification sign and a common trash enclosure. A landscape plan is included with the submittal. The three buildings have gable roof forms, 6 inch cedar siding, and stucco is the primary material with an asphalt shingle roof. Pylman stated that staff feels this is a complete application, but the Commission needs to talk about the roofing material and the color scheme. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 19, 1990 Page 23 of 24 Lot 89, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision,_Ken Sortland Deer Ridge 6 Unit Development, Design Review, continued Steve Rider, representing Ken Sortlard, stated that he had samples of the colors for the buildings and the stucco. The color would be navajo white. The stains would be semi -transparent. He described the layout of the buildings on the site. He described the drainage. Chairman Doll explained to Mr. Riden about the Worksession held prior to this meeting, at which the Commission discussed the matter of roofing materials to be allowed in the Town of Avon. Officially, wood shake shingles, woodruff masonite shingles, concrete tile, or sod, will be approved for the Wildridge area. Mr. Riden stated that they would be happy to go to the woodruff type shingles. Further discussion followed on roofing materials. Hunn stated that he was concerned that each of the units lacks a turnaround space. Discussion followed on this matter. The second unit seems to be the tightest one. Discussion followed on the flue space and the gas hot air to be used. Discussion followed on the transition of materials around the elevations. Discussion followed on the size and width of the chimney mass. It was susggested that it be finished in stucco and moved off the corner a bit. It was suggested that the chimney be brought to the ground. Discussion followed on the mirror imaging. Discussion followed on the snow shedding into the entry of one of the units. Discussion followed on the landscaping. Jeppson asked if it would be irrigated. Sortland stated that it would be hand watered by each owner. These units will be subdivided. Further discusssion followed on the mirror image factor. Further discussion followed on the materials mix. It was suggested that maybe the trim color could be changed on each building. Buz Reynolds moved to approve the design review for Lot 89, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision with the revisions to the driveway to the middle unit as specified; the chimney details lowered to the ground and moved off of the corner; the landscaping be excluded from this approval and to be brought back; and woodruff shingles to be used. These revisions be brought back prior to issuance of building permit. McRory seconded. The motion carried with Jeppson and Perkins voting nay. The Commission decided to do the approval of the minutes at "`i F"*S PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING June 19, 1990 Page 24 of 24 the next regular meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 1:40 AM. Respectfully submitted, Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary Commissi F. Doll T. Jepps J. Hunn J. Perki S. Railt C. McRor A. Reync �7/_ / 1 a