Loading...
PZC Minutes 051992RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on May 19, 1992, at 7:30 PM in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Rd., Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Perkins. Members Present: John Perkins, Buz Reynolds, Patti Dixon, Sue Railton, Henry Vest, Jack Hunn Rhod:> Schneiderman Staff Present: Jim Curnutte, Town Planner; Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development; Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary All members were present. Creek Subdivision, _Fait_h iew_Use,_Public Hearin Ct,irman John Perkins stepped down as a voting member of the Commission since he is representing the Church. Vice Chairman Jack Hunn presided over the meeting at this time. Jim Curnutte stated that substantial changes have been made from the previous plan submitted. The lot is a little over one half of an acre in size. Open space surrounds the property on the north and east sides. The A -Y Townhomes on Lot 44 is directly to the west of the property, with Nottingham Road and I-70 to the south. The property is zoned for residential low density, which provides for single family, two family and multi -family dwellings at a density not to exceed seven and one half units per acre. A church is listed as a special review use in the RLD zone district to allow discussion on any potential impacts. The two story church is approximately 5600 square feet, located on the northeast corner of the lot. There is an approximate 4300 square foot parsonage, located on the northwest side of the lot and the southern 2/3rds of the lot will contain the access aisles PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 2 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES and parking, landscaping and retaining walls. Thirty one parking spaces are being provided. The church will house a fellowship hall, kitchen, restrooms and classrooms on the first floor, and on the second floor there will be a 90 seat sanctuary, offices, counciling rooms and a nursery. The parsonage will house a two car garage and a guest apartment on the first floor, and the pastor's family living quarters on the second and third floors. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria for reviewing a special review use, stating that the proposal is in conformance with all portions of the zoning code, it appears that the proposed use is in general conformance with the Avon Comprehensive Plan, and that Staff believes that traffic impacts associated with this use occurs predominantly on Sunday, at which time traffic levels on Nottingham Road are at their lowest. Regarding the proposed use compatibility with adjacent uses, the adjacent property owners have been notified, as required, and the scale of the proposed buildings will be very similar to existing development along Nottingham Road. He stated that letters regarding this proposal have been received from Ron Iverson, Pat Hite, Christy Vandussen, Julieta Valles, John Perkins, and Rich Vandussen in support of the proposed application. A letter was received from Reynolds/Smith recommending denial of the application. One dissimilarity is that the parking is in front instead of the back, but that is dictated by the topography of the lot. The lighting of the parking lot will be a design issue. The application did not provide any new information regarding possible noise impacts. Curnutte stated that Staff feels that a church is an appropriate use with the following conditions: 1. The property be limited to uses typically associated with church activities (weekend services, sunday school, weddings, bible study, etc.) Any expansion of use beyond that discussed must be brought back to the Commission for review. 2. No external noise making devices will be allowed (bells, speakers, etc.) and internal noise volume should be kept to a level compatible with surrounding residential properties. Rick Pylman stated that a petition, signed by 15 people listing their addresses as Nottingham Road, in support of the proposed church, has been received. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 3 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES John Perkins stated that he feels that this is an important issue to be discussed. He then reviewed his letter to the Commission, covering the concerns that the Commission had at the previous meeting. This letter covered the concerns regarding the traffic on Nottingham Road; the steepness of the access ramp, (they have lengthened the access drive and lowered the grade of the parking lot, making the grade of the drive 6-2/3rds percent; they have reduced the parking to 31 on grade parking spaces; they have moved the proposed church building to the east portion of lot 45 and have removed the parsonage from the church structure and proposed the parsonage as a separate residential structure adjacent to lot 44; they have removed parking and created an area of intense landscaping to buffer both the parsonage and the parking from lot 44; They have added appropriate landscaping along Nott.;ngham Road; They have reduced the depth of the proposed building by 4 feet and added a strip of landscaping between the parking lot and the building; They have reduced the gross square footage proposed from 12,600 sq. ft. to 10,000 sq. ft.; Mr Perkins stated that he had spoken with Keith Taylor, who had voiced objections at the last meeting, regarding the changes made and while Mr. Taylor agreed that the changes would approve the submittal, he remains opposed. Perkins stated that he believes that they have addressed every major concern of the May 5th meeting. He believes that they have demonstrated that lot 45 will work effectively as a church and parsonage site. Perkins stated that he feels that the parking being on the southern side of the lot is an advantage. Chambertin has problems with fire lane and parking behind their building. You also have the sun/shade problem and the north side of those buildings seldom thaw. Also, putting the parking behind the buildings would require another major retaining wall. Perkins stated that the Pastor's letter indicated that there would be no bells, no loud noises introduced into the neighborhood. Vice Chairman Hunn then opened the public hearing. Lou Ann Shipiro, a resident of the valley for 14 years spoke in favor of the church on Lot 45. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 4 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES John Hazard reminded the Commission that all the letters of support are from people not living in the neighborhood and suggested a survey of the adjacent properties. Tim Kehoe spoke in support of a church on the property. Betty Vandussen, stated that she lives un Nottingham Road and she is the one that got the petition signed. Residents signing were from Chambertin and the lot right next to lot 45. With no further public input, Vice Chairman Hunn closed the public hearing and called for Commission review. Patty Dixon stated that she is still in support of this project. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that this is a much better project and feels that she could support it at this time. Henry Vest asked about the owner of the lot to the east of lot 45. Perkins stated that that property is owned by the Town of Avon and is open space. He stated that they would like to approach the Town regarding the possibility of getting an access easement off this property to provide a better access to the church property. Sue Railton stated that she feels that they have addressed all the concerns very well and she fully supports the project now. Buz Reynolds had some concerns with the height of the retaining Nall. John Perkins described how it would be constructed. Reynolds also asked what would happen if the church expanded, with only 31 parking spaces. Perkins stated that they would have to have more services. Jack Hunn stated that he feels that they had done an excellent job in responding to the concerns of the last meeting. Breaking up the building scale helped make it fit into the residential neighborhood. Sue Railton moved to grant special review use approval to Lot 45, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Faith Christian Fellowship Church, citing compliance with criteria A, B, and C as stated in the Staff report, and including conditions 1 and 2 as recommended by Staff. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 5 of 26 -IN -�N ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 1 and part of Lot 9. Shamrock, Special Revi Jim Curnutte stated that the front page of the Staff report is a memo stating that since the application presented tonight has not changed from the application presented on March 3, 1992, which was denied, Staff did not prepare a new staff report. Since the time of the writing of the memo, some letters, for and against, have come in and the applicants have made a few minor changes to things like the landscape plan, etc. Staff will review the staff report from the last meeting and if any changes have been made, the applicant will cover them. Curnutte stated that the reason for going through the staff report again is that there are two new members on the Planning Commission. Curnutte stated that David Galloway, of Galloway, Romero and Assciates, on behalf of Diamond Shamrock, who would like to locate an automobile service station on Lot 1 and part of Lot 2, Nottingham Station Subdivision. The lot is about 31,600 square feet in size. It is currently zoned Neighborhood Commercial. The intention of the Neighborhood Commercial District is to provide sites for commercial facilities and services for the principle benefit of convenience commercial ncads. The purpose of listing automobile service station as a !z:aecial review use is to allow the Planning Commission a certain level of review to attach any additional conditions or performance standards necessary to bring the project up to a level that the Commission feels comfortable with as it relates to the criteria. The development consists of a one story building with a floor area of about 1500 square feet with a canopy structure located above the building. There are some underground gasoline storage tanks. There are 3 12,000 gallon and one 8,000 gallon tanks. Curnutte described the easements running along the Avon Road side of the property. He sta ",! that the canopy is about 49' x 103'and nearly 19' off of the ground. There are sufficient parking spaces, including a handicap parking space located near the door. The previous plans showed a truck turnaround/future access way that has been deleted with this application. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria, stating that the proposal is in conformance with the Avon Zoning Code. He stated that this is subarea number 4 in the Comprehensive Plan, which is Town Gateway. It is critical that properties in this area are developed in a manner that creates an attractive appearance. Also some other goals applicable to this application and those are: Enhance the Town's role as a principal, year-round residential and commercial center in the valley. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 7 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES ion Diamond �tiewy Public of Beaver Creek Resort Association. The last two were submitted at the previous public hearing and it was requested that they be presented at this hearing. Hugh Green, Corporate Real Estate Representative for Diamond Shamrock, stated that they were not reapplying at the Town's request. He stated that they feel that they did not do a good job with the previous presentation and they are back to do a better job because they think it is a top quality project. They are pleased with the progress they have made with the Town Staff. He stated that one of the revisions is the replacement of the red canopy with a white canopy. This is a major concession for Diamond Shamrock. They feel that this goes a long way in down playing the attention to the site. He stated that if the design is a major concern, they have no objections tc going back and working with the Staff to come up with something different. They have to try to stay with this particular concept on this particular lot, however. He stated that a traffic impact analysis was done and it will be presented at this meeting. All the plans have been reviewed by the State Oil Inspectors Office and a letter of opinion is also presented. He stated that they have added 40% more trees to mitigate the massing. He stated that there is a need for this project and they feel that they are the top company that can fill that need. He stated that he has been working in the valley for about three years and there simply is no other site zoned along Avon Road, along the Interstate, next to Pizza Hut there is a mountainside that would not be feasible. Additionaly, it is deed restricted against gasoline. This is the only site that meets their criteria. He used West Vail as an example of stations located near a water way. They feel that they have a very sound environmental plan that has been presented to Staff. He introduced George Petre, representing the property owner, Dave Galloway and David Moore , of Galloway, Romero & Associates, Consulting Engineers, and Kathleen Kreger of Kreger and Associates, consulting transportation engineer. Mr. Green thanked the Commission for the opportunity to make this presentation and stated that he is available for questions later. He then turned the meeting over to George Petre. Mr. Petre gave a brief history of the proposed site and how it PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 6 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Provide for increased opportunities for development of service-oriented commercial and light industrial uses, with proper controls to encure compatibility. Ensure that a high quality visual image of the Town is established through both public and private sector activities. Ensure that the high quality, natural environment is preserved and integrated into the developed areas of the Town. Ensure that future development will minimize degradation of the environment, particularly in sensitive natural areas. Protect and enhance the water quality of the Eagle River and Nottingham lake. Regarding compatibility. Staff feels that the applicant has made great strides toward ensuring this proposal's compatibility with adjacent uses. The biggest concern Staff had was the protection of the Eagle River and lighting. The applicants have provided a lighting plan showing the impact of the lighting. It shows, essentially, that no light will be spilling over ;he property lines teyond a certain minima: intensity. In addition, they have agreed to recess the canopy lights and no direct sources should be seen. The site lights have also been recessed. lite sign will be up lit from the ground. The store lighting will also be recessed into the ceiling. Regarding the second concern of environmental impacts to the Eagle River, the applicant is proposing state-of-the-art secondary fuel containment systems with double wall tanks and piping systems, vapor recovery, etc. The applicant has provided information regarding how small or large spills would be handled. Curnutte then described the grading and drainage plan. Curnutte stated that Staff feels that an automobile service station is an appropriate use for this site. The proximity of the Eagle River does raise environmental concerns, however, Statt feels that the applicant has demonstrated that the use can be designed and controlled to mitigate the possible impacts of gasoline contamination to the Eagle River. Therefore , Staff is recommending approval of the special review use request. Jim Curnutte stated that letters from Gene Edwards, Donald Finn, and J W Moeller, and L D Thomas, in support of '..iis application has been received. There are three letters suggesting denial from John Hazard, from Andrew Daly, of Vail Associates and Bob Mcllveen PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 8 of 26 Lct_ 1 and part of Lot 2 Nottingham Station Subdivision. Diamond Rhamrnr.k_ Special Review Use .and Final _Design Review__P_u .,blic became zoned neighborhood commercial. He statea that at the time that discussions were being held regarding uses, and before the property was annexed to the Town, filling stations were an allowed use. They feel that this is a proper use for this site and the owner also feels that this is only part of the overall commitment that the Town made with them at the time of the annexation and dedication of the road and dedication to the open spaces. They hope and expect the Town to fulfill their commitments to the owners for the development of this property for this purpose. Dave Galloway, Consulting Engineer for Diamond Shamrock, reviewed a chart he had made up of zoning requirements, the Town of Avon Design Guidelines, and the Town of Avon Master Plan. With each Town requirement, Mr. Galloway stated that they have met or exceeded the requirement and described how they have met i`.. Mr Galloway stated that they have incorporated each and every design element that the Town requires. They have added extra landscaping, they have increased the setback, 1:hey went for a smaller ground sign and moved it to locations that aren't really the best for them. He feels that this will be an aesthetically pleasing project. He stated that they comply with all criteria for a special review use. They also meet the goals and objectives of the Master Plan. He stated that, regarding the potential for stream and air pollution, they have provided a lot of redundant containment systems and storm water treatment that normally wouldn't be associated with a facility such as this. He stated that they do not feel that they will impact any of the public or private facilities. They have the ability to handle any event that may happen on the site from the standpoint of a fuel product discharge. The State Oil Inspector's letter states that they not only meet every requirement, but in almost every instance they provide a second layer of safety. They have tied their site design features into the Avon Road landscape plan and existing improvement on Avon Road. They have provided a traffic study that indicates that there is no impact. Mr. Galloway then reviewed sections of the Master Plan and stated again that they met each one. He stated that he hopes that the Commission doesn't miss the point. If they look at the criteria that the Commission has to pass judgement of the project, they have to agree that they meet all the criteria. Hugh Green stated that he and the traffic consultant will be available to answer any questions forthcoming. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 9 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Jim Curnutte stated that he has a couple of copies of the traffic study if anyone would like to read it, but basically it reaches the conclusion that Avon Road and Hurd Lane are acceptable for this type of use. Chairman Perkins then opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. He asked that each person please state their name, and the area of the valley they live in. Mauri Nottingham stated that he lives about a quarter of a mile up stream from this project and he suffers from a "not in my front yard" syndrome. He further described how Lot 1 ano 2 came into being. He stated that the traffic stud• did not take into consideration the future development of his land which possibly could have 150 units on it, nor did they take into consideration that Huid Lane will probably be connected to Eaglebend Drive in the future. He then voiced his concerns regarding the systems for controlling spills and he reviewed some figures he had regarding past spills. Helen Weiss stated that she is not a resident of Avon, she resides in Edwards. She stated that she is not an environmentalist, however she is very concerned regarding the quality of life and the changes in that quality of life that this would bring to Avon. She feels that the impact of anything that happens up valley on the Eagle River will effect all of them down valley. She also is concerned with the monitoring and control systems also. She says her water would be effected just the way the Town water would be effected. She stated that, even though they have met all the guidelines of the Town, this site is not the proper site for a gas station. She stated that ".he applicant stated that there are no other sites, well we hax,e no other river, we have no other secondary water supply. She urged the Commission to deny this application. Colleen Bird stated that she is not opposed to a Diamond Shamrock station, but is deeply opposed to the location. She feels that it is an eyesore. There has to be some other site other than next to the river. She asked that they save the environment and keep the water clean. Rick Rosen, legal counsel for Beaver Creek Property Owners Association and a business owner in the Town of Avon, stated that in contrast to the applicant's comments, the majority of Beaver Creek homeowners in the Association strongly discourage the use of this site as a gas station, even though we do need another gas PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 10 of 26 Lot 1 and part of Lot 2 Nottingham Station Subdivision. Diamond __� 4. 1 nee, ,r PaviAW. Public station. Please do not locate it next to the river. If the river is tainted there will be no snow making equipment for Beaver Creek, there will be no rafting, fishing or drinking water down valley. He stated that traffic is a problem, in contrast to what the applicant has said. He compared the traffic caused by City Market and Wal-Mart. He also stated that the gas station is no more than visual pollution. If a gas station is to be in a mountain town, make it look like it fits in a mountain town. He felt that since there is no major changes in the application from the previous application, he feels that this should not even be before the Commission again. He urged the Commission to deny this request again. Martin Weiss stated that they have been coming to the valley or living in the valley for a period of twenty years. He reminded the Commission that a gas station is not a use by right in the neighborhood commercial zone district. He felt that the proposed site is the wrong place. Just because it meets the legal requirements doesn't mean that it is smart to be placed on this site. John Hazard, a resident of Avon and a Town Council member, stated that the Town has been working very hard on the landscaping along the road and have approved one million eight to try to beautify this town. This is the main entrance to Avon, and to see a gas station on the main entrance is not appropriate. If he knew there would be a gas station on the main road, he would not have voted to spend that much money on improveme.its, just to have it ruined by a gas station. Celeste Nottingham stated that she has been a resident of Avon about thirteen years. She is also an Avon Town Council member. She stated that the Commission has a hard decision to make. Her concern is the river. Just because it is legal doesn't mean it is smart. With no other public input forthcoming, Chairman Perkins then closed the public hearing and called for comments from the Commission. Patti Dixon stated that there is a need for another gas station, but the integrity of the Town is more important and she is opposed to this station because of the location. She felt it was too visible, and the architecture and lighting is not appropriate for a small town like Avon. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 11 of 26 Rhoda Schneiderman asked about tests for ground water. Dave Galloway stated that they did tests at the depth the tanks would be and did not encounter ground water. Schneiderman asked if what they were doing would meet all states standards. Mr. Galloway stated that he is not famililar with all states, but they are far beyond standard for the Federal Government. Schneiderman then inquired about monitoring controls. Mr. Galloway then described the method of monitoring the tanks and the requlations for the monitoring. Schneiderman commented that the station would not have to look like a gas station does in Denver. She stated that she could not look at a place like this design every day. Mr. Galloway stated they would be willing to work with the Staff in producing something appropriate. Hugh Green stated that they would like to come up with a design that is acceptable. Henry Vest stated that he cannot understand why they have spent so much money on placing this station on this particular site. He asked if they had considered the site next to Coastal Mart. Mr Green stated that they could not use that site because it would make them secondary to Coastal Mart. They feel that this particular site is the best location in the Town of Avon. The station has to be on Avon Road, because that is where the traffic is. Jack Hunn stated that Avon would benefit from another gas station, and he commended the applicant on their professional presentation and the willingness to install state-of-the-art equipment to attempt to mitigate the concerns regarding the Eagle River. However, he agrees that the best you can get may not be good enough in this case. He stated that he agrees that the proposal does comply with the underlying zoning. He thinks that there are a number of areas in the Comprehensive Plan that they are not in compliance with. Another concern is the potential incompatibility with the probable adjacent uses, which cannot be determined at this time as it is not known what will be built down the street. It can be assumed that it will generate traffic and it will probably be some form of residential development. Because nis project does not meet these criteria, he could not support granting the special review use. Sue Railton stated that her concern is that Avon is spending this vast amount of money on street improvements and here we are putting a gas station in the middle of the improvements. Also she is concerned about the proximity of the Eagle River. Buz Reynolds stated that he has a problem of the proximity of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 12 of 26 river. It has nothing to do with the company, or the building, it is just the matter of being near the river. John Perkins stated that his comments would echo the fellow Commission members comments. He differs with the staff in respect to the Comprehensive Plan, specifically, high quality image of the Town, the high quality potential natural environment, that future development will minimize degradation of the environment, particularly in naturally sensitive areas, and to protect and enhance the water quality of the Eagle River and Nottingham Lake. Jack Hunn moved to deny the proposed Special Review Use for Lot 1, and part of Lot 2, Nottingham Station Subdivision, Diamond Shamrock because it fails to meet the three criteria established by the Town ordinances and specifically is in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan in the following specific areas: 1. The proposal does not ensure a high quality visual image of the Town on the proposed site. 2. It does not minimize adequately the degradation of the environment in particularly sensitive natural areas. 3. It does not adequately enhance and protect the water quality of the Eagle River. 4. It potentially causes traffic problems. Patti Dixon seconded the motion. Discussion followed on item 4 and it was decided to leave the item in the motion. The motion to deny carried unanimously. Subdivision, Jim Curnutte stated that no information had been provided along with the application, therefore, Staff is recommending tabling this item until said information is provided by the applicant. Buz Reynolds moved to table Lots 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Contractor's Yard and Soil Storage until the next meeting. Henry Vest seconded and the motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 13 of 26 Lot 65/66 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver creek _Subdivision,_ The Annex Sian Program Amendment, Design Review Patti Dixon stepped down as a voting member of the Commission, since she is a tenant in the Annex building. Jim Curnutte stated that Pat Barron is requesting an amendment to the existing sign program for the Annex. Curnutte stated that the applicant has recently requested another amendment to specifically allow temporary banners. This amendment will also include the previous amendment, making this a complete document. Curnutte provided a document entitled "the Amended and Restated Sign Program for the Annex Shopping Center". It is considerably more detailed in its controls than the previous sign program. The drawing provided is the only sign program at this time. What this program will do will specify what will be allowed. Eighteen inch high individual letters will be allowed; cabinet signs will be allowed to be incorporated into the total sign area; It will specifically allow corner tenants to place signage around the corner from their main entry; It will allow the interior space tenants that are not on corners, (spaces 2, 3, 4, 14, 15, and 16) to place signage on the east walls of the building, which currently is not used for signage. Curnutte then reviewed the Sign Design Guidelines which should be considered and then reviewed the criteria to be considered when approving a sign program. The minimum sign size will be three feet. The sign types allowed in the amendment are the same as the previous program, with the exception the cabinet signs are specifically addressed. The main change in this program is to allow the interior space tenants to display signage on the building in a location that is not directly contiguous with their space. The only visual change in this amendment would be to allow a few additional signs to be located on the north and south, east facing wing walls of the building. Since the overall sign area allowed on these wall is limited to a total of 18 sq. ft., the visual impact should be minimal. Staff recommends approval of the proposed sign program amendment with the following conditions: 1. The ability to place signs on the east face of the building should be limited to interior tenant spaces 2, 3, 4, 14, 15, and 16. Curnutte stated that the applicant has agreed with this condition. 2. Exhibit "B" should be expanded to show the limits of sign location on the east facing wall of the building. The applica•it has provided this information. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 14 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 3. The "General" section portion of the sign program should be rewritten to better clarify the owners intent with regard to total sign allowance on the east facing walls of the building. Discussion followed on the amount of signage to be allowed each tenant on the side walls. Pat Barron stated that the amendment has been well covered by the staff report. The concern with this amendment was to allow the interior tenant to have the extra signage. Considerable discussion followed on which tenants would be allowed to install signage on the east facing walls and the size of the signs. Discussion followed on the matter of trees having to be trimmed in order for the signs to be seen as planned. Discussion followed on the necessity for this request. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve the sign program amendment contingent upon the revisions, that the sign area allowed be within 30 feet from the edge of the building; a minimum of 3 square feet per sign and the cabinet sign to be no more than 35% of the sign proposed as built. Sue Railton seconded ano the motion carried four to two with Jack Hunn and Henry Vest voting nay. Patti Dixon resumed her seat as a voting member of the Commission. Buz Reynolds stepped down due to a conflict of interest. Jim Curnutte stated that Brent Alm , representing the owners, is requesting final design review for a single family residence that will be accessed from Flat Point. A 14' wide asphalt driveway and large turnaround /parking area is provided. The 2-1/2 story residence is approximately 4000 square feet in size, including the unfinished basement, but not including the three car garage. Maximum building height does not exceed 35 ft. There are two gas fireplaces included. There is a large wraparound deck on the south and west sides. Some of the materials being proposed are Timberline Ultra asphalt shingles, STK cedar siding (sandstone color), river rock, and stucco siding on the lower portion, metal clad windows, wood doors , and redwood decks with cedar rails. A grading/drainage/landscape plan has been provided and shows that all disturbed areas will be revegetated as much as possible with PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 15 of 26 Lot 35, Bloc'c 3. Wildridge Subdivision.__Brust_Res_idence ,__Flnal Design Reviero,_ cont transplanted materials and other disturbed areas will be reseeded with a high altitude wildflower/grass seed mix. Proposed irrigation will be by hand. At conceptual review the Commission made the following comments: - Consider more significant deck columns - This has been addressed by the applicant. - Remove stone work in front of and on the side of the garage and consider adding stones at the entry way - This has been done. - Consider stucco at all areas below the architectural band on the three sides of the building - Again, that has been done. - Consider a hip roof at the east garage elevation, instead of a gable roof - This has not been addressed. - The proposed asphalt shingle should be the heaviest texture possible in the weathered wood color. - The removal of pavement within 10' of front lot line - the applicant has addressed this as well. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria for considering a final design review, stating that the application is in conformance with the zoning code and applicabl% rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. The type and quality of building materials and landscape materials are very compatible. The residence has been sated on the lot in e manner which reduces site impacts to adjacent properties. All grading will be contained on the lot. The house has been sited in the most reasonable building location on the property. The building presents a nice face to people approaching either from the north or south. Some additional landscaping would help along the east side. Staff recommends approval of the final design review application with the comment of final staff review of the grading and drainage plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. bent Alm stated that, regarding the garage roof, economically they want to use trusses in there and it works better not to go with the hip roof, so they dropped the roof down two feet which brings the massing down quite a bit. He stated that some landscaping could be added to the east side. Discussion followed on the size of the garage door. Discussion PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 16 of 26 Lot 35 Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Brust Residence, Final_ Design Review, (cont) followed on where the meters would be located and how they would be screened. Discussion also followed on the sizes of the proposed landscaping. It was felt that the scale of the proposed plants is pretty minimul. It was suggested that the landscaping plan be brought back showing more quantity and perhaps larger sizes, and give some thought to the east side and possibly put more planting to highlight the entrance. It was recommended that the applicant consider an automatic irrigation system. Discussion followed on the colors to be used. It was suggested lightening up the stucco for more contrast. Jack Hunn moved to grant final design approval to Lot 35, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, subject to the following conditions: - The landscape plan be reconsidered and brought back at a subsequent meeting. - The final exterior colors also be confirmed at that meeting. - Mr. Hunn amended his motion to include the staff recommendations. Patti Dixon seconded. Jim Curnutte stated that these conditions should not hold the building permit process, and the Commission agreed. The motion carried unanimously. Lot 17, Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Dan Karzen for KSO Development Group Fireridge Townhomes, Final Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that Dan Karzen is requesting final design approval of a four-plex on Lot 17. The lot is slightly over a half an acre in size. It has frontage on Old Trail Road and Ssaddleridge Loop, but will be accessed via Saddleridge Loop. The driveway is 18' wide an will be paved. There are 18 parking spaces on the property. Each of the four-plexes has a two car garage and each has two spaces in front of the garage. In audition two parking spaces are provided o.f to the side. The trash area is where the individual trash cans will be placed on trash day. Exterior building materials include rustic cedar channel siding, 2" x 8" with 1" x 4" rough sawn cedar trim, aluminum windows and 6 panel metal doors, redwood decks and rails. The applicant is proposing an asphalt shingle, the weathered wood Presidential Celotex, at about 370 lbs per square. A grading and drainage plan has been provided along with a landscape plan. The landscape plan shows a reasonable variety of good size trees and shrubs and all disturbed areas will be Pi '4ING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Ma 9, 1992 Pat,e 17 of 26 ireridg_e_Townhomes� Gan sign Review. (cont) reseeded with a native grass seed mix, and irrigation is proposed to be by hand. Curnutte reviewed the changes made to this project in respons-) to the comments made by the Commission at conceptual design review as follows: The location of the building hae been shifted somewhat to take better advantage of view corridors; The amount of asphalt on the lot has bean reduced; Fenestration changes have been made to all four elevations; All siding areas previously shown with the vertical siding have been replaced with stucco or windows; Box bay windows have been added to the second floor bedrooms of units 1 an 3 and the 3rd floor bedrooms in units 2 and 4; Mono pitched roofs, with eyebrows, have been added over the 3rd floor bedrooms on the north elevation in Units 2 and 4 and over the living rooms on the south elevation units 1 and 3. The shingle color has been changed from a dark brown t- a weathered wood color. A project identification sign has been shown on the site plan. Curnutte Lhen reviewed the criteria for considering a final design review, stating that the proposal is in conformance with :he zoning code. The proposed building materials are all commonly found throughout Wildridge. The landscape plan has been upgraded in response to the Commis ion comments at conceptual review. The applicant is aware tha--. he will be required to install the landscape materials in the sizes and species identified on the flan. All grading will be contained within the lot lines. The applicant has provided large berms and landscape materials along the front. The visual appearance seems acceptable. The applicant has made a significant number of building changes to improve its appearance, especially on the north side, which was of most concern with the Commission at the last meeting. The project is very similar to the Wildridge Townhomes on Lot 46, however there are at least twenty two changes that have been made to this project. Staff feels that those changes are sufficient to negate potential negative impacts with regard to similarity. In addition PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 18 of 26 Karzen for KSO Development Group Final Design Review (cont) the distance from lot 46 and the orientation on the lot and the color scheme differences go a long way to differentiate this project from the one previously approved. Staff is recommending approval of the final design review as preserted. Chairman Perkins asked if Staff could provide the elevations of the Lot 46 project. Mr Curnutte stated that he would get them. Dan Karzen stated that, from comments made at the conceptual review, the major points were to improve fenestrations, particularly on the Old Trail Road side. They have made a number of changes in the windows and roof lines and introduced stucco material. They reviewed site orientation and shifted the building to get as much as they can out of the view corridor. Mr. Karzen then provided samples of the colors to be used. He also provided samples of the colors that were used on Lot 46. John Perkins asked how much depth he was seeing, on the north elevation, from the closest plane to the furtherest plane. Skip Organ stated that from unit to unit there is an eight foot change. He went on to describe various depths on each level. Dan Karzen stated that the suggestion of supping was not economically feasible. This was the only suggestion that they could not do something about. He further described the changes that had been made and were previously described by Jim Curnutte. Considerable discussion followed on thesq changes. Of concern were the eyebrow roofs. Rhoda Schneiderman voiced concerns that there were no interesting windows on the 2nd and 4th units and discussion followed on this matter. The ap�licant stated that the 1st and 3rd units are vaulted ceilings, but the 2nd and 4th are not, that is a false gable. Schneiderman stated that she thinks that the landscaping is very inadequate for that many units. Discussion followed on this matter also. Discussion then followed on the comparison of elevations of this building with the bu)lding on Lot 46. Considerable concern was voiced that it still reads as virtually the same building. The applicant stated that a great deal of changes in materials, windows have been done. They have a floor plan that was designed for this building and are limited as to what they can do. John Perkins stated that he does not feel that the applicants have been very creative in the approach to this solution. PLANNING AND May 19, 1992 Page 19 of 26 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Dan Further discussion followed on the roof lines and the visibility of them, and the materials to be used. The proximity of this project with Lot 46 was discussed in detail. Rhoda Schneiderman stated chat it wouldn't really cost any mire money to have an interesting exterior design and not have to change the floor plan. She stated that the applicant is not looking at this as another project totally. They are looking at it as a kind of an adjunct to the other on and being able to use the same basic design and just redo it a bit. The applicant asked if there was something unpleasant about the design. Schneiderman stated no, but personally, she doesn't think that it is so special that it should be approved the second time. The problem is that it is a prominent site and this call for something a little nicer. Sue Railton felt that in some areas the design has become over complicated. The west elevation on the top area where there are three different sizes sort of popping out is a bit messy. The south elevation where the cross struts have been added is not reading as having much variety. She was concerned with the planes on the top. Mr Karzen stated that, from the comments made last meeting, they tried to add detail. Ms. Railton stated that there is good detail and messy detail and this is messy. She pointed out on the elevations what she was concerned with. Further discussion followed on the units being repetitious and comparisons were made with neighboring projects as examples of how a project could be done without being repititious. It was suggested that possibly clustering could be considered. John Perkins stated that he did not feel that the applicants have taken a real run at this. Jack Hunn stated that he is still concerned about the orientation of the site. The applicant stated that thev cannot move it any more because of the setbacks. The Commission felt that there is flexibility in rotating the building. Considerable discussion followed on the view corridors. The Commission and the applicant did not agree on which was the best view corridor. Jack Hunn stated that the proper orientation to view leads to some interesting solutions. It would allow the applicant to step the units vertically, which would cost money, but it adds a lot of interest to the project. There would be less impact to the neighbor. He felt that the landscaping falls short of being an adequate plan. He stated that it has to have an irrigation plan. Who among the four owners will be watering the trees. He stated that he has never heard of any soils problems there that would PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 20 of 26 prohibit the installation of an automatic irrigation system. There has been no attempt to screen the huge asphalt area from the adjacent properties. Four trees will not do that. The design is pre -conception imposed on this site. He understands that this is for economic reasons. He stated that the applicant is not starting with the site and what works on trio site, but taking a plan that they have used successfully and sold successfully and trying to impose it on to the site. He stated that the Commission had suggested the use of stucco, but in a larger quantity than the applicant has indicated, perhaps the base of the building being stucco to give it the impression that it has a heavy base. He felt the mor- •oof form is awkward. Buz Reynolds felt that the building should be stepped. This would get rid of a lot of the repetitious detail. He feels that that would be the best thing to do. He stated that is all he had for ideas. He didn't really have any problems with the project. Henry Vest stated that he would like to apologize for the Commission. He thinks that the major problem is that this project is very close to the one that has been done. He feels that the Commission might not have made this clear at the conceptual level. John Perkins stated that this is probably a good point. Jack Hunn moved to deny final design review approval for Lot 17, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, for the following reasons: Desiar, review consideration 6.13 - Compatibility of the design to minimize impact on adjacent properti-s. 6.15 - The visual appearance of the project as viewed from adjacent properties. 6.25 - Item #4 - Repetitious design characteristics are discouraged. Patti Dixon seconded. The motion carried with a five to two vote, with Henry Vest and Buz Reynolds voting nay. Tract B Block 2 Filing 2 Eaglebend Subdivision, The A1� nes-at Eaglabend Final Design Review Rick Pylman stated that the PUD amendment was approved at the last Planning and Zoning Commission meeting and subsequently was approved at the last Town Council meeting. The applicant is asking for final design review approval on four house models and four color schemes for approximately 19 single family residences PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 21 of 26 nes ,at (21 including the two already constructed), depending on how they sell. The materials will be a Tamko asphalt shingle for the roofing in an antique grey color. Siding will be a masonite product. Several �D)ifferent textures and board sizes will be used to create interest and contrast among the units. All the windows will be white aluminum with a 1 x 4 cedar trim. Elevations of the four units have been provided. Pylman stated that staff recommends approval of the four model homes for construction with the following recommendations: 1. Approve the two story model with some treatment to the exposed concrete foundation walls, either stucco or paint. 2. Approval cf the tri -level model to be conditional upon the siting of the home. The elevation identified as the right elevation is weak with only one window, and should be used only as the north elevation. The applicant would rather add some windows than restrict the siting of this model. 3. Revisions to the fireplace chase on the Mountain Laurel model are strongly suggested. Staff feels that other than these recommendations, the houses meet the criteria of the Planning and Zoning Commission Guidelines. Russell Thatcher stated that they have siding samples and a color board for the Commission to iook at. He stated that they would rather redo the one side of the tri -level than have it restricted in siting, because that is the long side and the lots are deeper than they are wide. Discussion followed on this mz*t--r. Discussion followed on the matter of the 'fioating" fireplace. The siding samples and color schemes were then discussed. Discussion followed on how the applicant plans to keep identical designs, materials and colors from being next to each other. Further discussion followed on what could be done on the long side of the tri -level unit. The applicant stated that they would paint the exposed concrete foundations. Considerable discussion followed on the pros and cons of all four models. Discussion followed on the materials to be used. Discussion followed on the landscape plan being very basic, and extremely small in sizes. J 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 22 of 26 pines At Chairman Perkins stated that he thinks that there are enough concerns being voiced by the Commission that he feels that perhaps this item should be tabled until the next meeting to give the applic,int time to address the following concerns: - Add interest to the side on the tri -level. - Texture and painted exposed concrete walls. - Windows above the garage door on the bi-level. - Cedar siding inEtead of the masonite, because the cedar has been established witn the other two units. - The landscaping plan is inadequate. One cottonwood centered in every back yard is not a successful solution. Chris Ekrem asked to speak regarding her concerns about this project. Her main concern is off street parking. She felt that the parking proposed is not adequate. She was also concerned with the designs of the windows and headers in the proposed plans. She agreed that the landscape plan needs considerable improvement and she was also concerned with the planned fence along the railroad. She felt that this is an imcomplete application and cannot understand how the Commission can even consider it at this time. Discussion followed on the parking requirements included in the PUD, which is 4 parking spaces. Discussion followed on whether the applicant will have to come in for design review for each of the 19 units or just this one time. It was the understanding of the staff that, unless they make some architectural changes to a unit, the applicant will not have to come in for design review on each unit. Further discussion followed on the proposed colors to be used. It was suggested that the white be toned down. Discussion followed on the asphalt shingle to be used. Jack Hunn moved to table this item 'until the June " 1992 meeting to allow the applicant to address the following concerns of the Commission. - Windows over the garage door on the bi-level model. - Improve finish on exposed foundation walls. PLANNING AND ZONI4G COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 23 of 26 ines at - Reconsider stucco colors in combination with grey siding colors. - Reconsider the bright tlue accent color. - Provide fencing detailu. - Resubmit the landscape plan with increased quantity and material sizes. - Reconsider the point at which the soca turns into seed. - Provide further information regarding the exterior lighting fixtures and quantity. - Confirm the weight of the asphalt shingles. - Resolve the blank elevation on the tri -level unit. - Provide a revised elevation indicating the modification to the floating chimney element. - Confirm which siding products will and will not be used. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Mountain Jim Curnutte stated that Joe Matyk, representing the potential purchaser of Lot 2, is re-uesting conceptual desi_in review of a proposed furniture store. Lot 2 is zoned Neighborh000 Commercial and a retail store is an allowed use. The Comprehensive Plan establishes this property as a gateway to the Town. G=velopment in this area should reflect the standard of development that occurs in the Town Center and in the Core Commercia'i area, however, it should not compete in terms of massing of buildings, etc. The Comprehensive Plan also goes on to say that Nottingham Road development should be developed as a secondary streetscape; limited access points should be provided to simplify traffic movements; require landscape setbacks and interior landscaping of parking lots; limit building heights should be limited to three or four stories. This site plan shows that the building is to be located on the southern 1/3rd of the lot, with the minimum required 24 parking spaces and one loading berth occupying the northern 2/3rds of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 24 of 26 vision_,_ Mountain lot. The building is approximately 7,500 sq. ft. in size and is divided up into the showroom area and the warehouse area. It is a flat roofed building with a mansart in the front. It is about 18 feet in height. Proposed building materials are 8" x 16" concrete block, ribbed faced in the front. Black metal is the mansart structure and black metal roof cap along the top, tinted grey store front glass on all four sides of the building. A roll up metal loading berth door will be facing Nottinghham Road. There will be signage along the front face of the building and a monument sign in front. As this is conceptual review no criteria will be provided. Staff feels that it is extremely imperative that development along this property present just as nice a face to I-70 as it does to Nottingham Road. In response to this, the applicant has added windows along the rear and sides of the building. The architecture of this building, in staff's opinion, would be more appropriately located in the industrial/commercial area. The information provided is insufficient to assess the sign program. Joe Matyk, stated that he feels with colors and windows the building could be made more attractive than it sounds in the staff report. Basically he is here to gather information on what the Commission would like to see at this location. Discussion followed on making the concrete block building attractive and making the I-70 side of the building as attractive as the north side of the building. The building should provide an attractive entrance. There should be more design to the building and the landscaping should blend in with the building and the parking. More of the parking area should be left for landscaping. It wa, suggested that a shared drive with C -Mart might be pursued. Mr. Matyk stated that the parking requirements determine the size of the parking area. Further discussion followed on how the landscaping could be improved. It was suggested that a pitched roof would be good for the design and possibly the use of two materials r: ner than just concrete block and possibly the use of shingles rather than a metal roof. It was suggested that the windows have more interest rather than just large plate glass. Chairman Perkins reviewed the comments of the Commission as follows: - Concrete block may not be acceptable. - Elevation to I-70 is important. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 25 of 26 uro,a r n - Concrete block needs to have some inviting interest. - Take a look at sidewalks. - The mansart roof is not satisfactory/prefer pitched roof. - More detail/design work and blend in the landscaping. - Too much pavement/more landscaping needed. - Upgrade exterior finishes to be compatible with others in area. - Pursue arrangement with C -Mart for backdoor access. - Image to I-70 and Nottingham Road are equally important. - Separate the service and the front door. - Contiguous materials around the perimeter of the building, perhaps bay windows. Lot 16 Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Holzman Remodel,_ Design Review Jim Curnutte provided photos of the remodel that is in process. Curnutte stated that the applicant was not aware that he needed Commission approval to enclose his hot tub area, but once he was notified he immediately stopped work and applied for design review and a building permit. The remodel involves enclosing the area directly below his second story deck and adding some fenestration to the walls. The lower half will be finished with diagonal redwood siding to match the building and will be stained to match. The upper half of the walls will be aluminum windows and there are doors on the south side of the enclosure. Staff is recommending approval of the remodel. It was suggested that a header should be lowered above the window next to the door to help the appearance. Need a consistent line of window trim. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve contingent upon the north window being changed to be consistent with the headers on the doors. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried with Jack Hunn voting nay. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 19, 1992 Page 26 of 26 Reading and Approval of the Planning_and_Zonin,,c_ QOM-Mi—ELIon Meeting Minutes for May 5, 1992 Henry Vest moved to approve the minutes for the May 5, 1992 i,ieeting as submitted. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Other Business Jack Hunn moved to approve Resolution 92-4, Tract B, Filing 2, Eaglebend PUD Approval. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Henry Vest moved to adjourn, was adjourned a 1:05 AM. Respectfully, submitted. Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary Commission app J S R A. Reynolds 19 7. J Jack Hunn seconded and the meeting ate_ col I CD