Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
PZC Packet 061504
June 15,2004 --b \ '4 SITE 1 . I + &* I. ./. ./ 3/ I.... % 'I ./. 11 1% N ·· -- . 'r . - ly t.). i 24 f N ':, . L T. . 1 COVER SHEE I ~~~'1 7. t~~ ·-9 /9'h..~ '\- ~~N~/f ~~k,4/.\ J>" *lk. , t i . 4.,· . it= ..4 79 1- 3.~ 1 --tr . t* / -:T---Thrt 4*27 - aj; 7 + .f ·-- . 1' . 2 fi -'Say' 4 '4 ,-,4 1 7. L, bvi LEv.1- 1.1, />'~ i WESTERN SAGE P.U.D. 1 144>029 1 1 ' ..1 , '/ ' -I' I. # 4..WA~. *. -' ),r· -1 -1 i.-t, ~ .iI»-f,17749.1.-,11 UL-if.Illf y. £ ; ~ LOTS 1 8, TRACK A, BLOCK 4 . ft-71 1( 1·.i' -:·--~·,-1.7-/®"tff. *.,t>ir~1 1 ' 4 1 r.xi.31·. WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION «3T'/•23* v# 1 - -:LFf#L RL#)1#.6*72441 - - -,~-- .* 11*.--',- - -- 4. % ~4' 9,• Ct,· ar i. 1-<1 -1.>,1~-#e \1-1 4%46? ' TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO . £ ; 4 t I #, . .7 , I \ - 0~ .-"· * 2/- \ . 1 I. , 1 I - ..11 .' *43. 1 -'. ./- t:,·»f \*t,-1·t . I . ....42. t f-.>jj~{f,t*7-../1~ .I77lfil-'.\>4 t~2~ zi -·1., AC.KSK;. ·w-1.¢7 // / il -. L'. 1 L VZ-3.3,/ 7.-1;35]4- . - , . .... 1 14 ~J. 4.-f , t.4, . ft. l , 1/ j r.t\ CERTIFICATE Of DEDICATION AND OWNERSHIP Knon * men by the#e piesent* 01,1 Jay K Petisition, 1·,t,1,1 exner ,ri fee •Irrple col all that rea; plope ly deswibed as folti,ws, Lots M , 55, 89 and 90, Block 4, W,ici ,}90, 1 owri ef Avor,~ Eagie County. C©k»ado, Reception Flo. , · *. 1 ' ,. ·· i fi- 7 ® Vvitf # 6 // b I - ./52+ 1 : 1 agree to develop Itia plan ms depicted 011 0,8 6}le IMI,n -2. ' *Ij'i'¢ff:1' *\~ •Ii· 11» ll 'Jf 1 /4 4 1 -11 Owiwi:s Represeritativi·: VAL CO 81657 J'Of ur~ I=11, >\. M I 100 S f ion{<ti Rd. SU;l E 108 I.>-2 '4 -'1 -'i·'~4'·--9~..jilri,/ 1 - _\4 -,- Iii ,\11¥'-1 3.41 , »ub*e me -1 ~·V, w vf* U s m STATE OF COLOIZAOO ) W:ID € IDGi 511 B D I V I S I O N; BLOCKS 1-5 ) SS COUNTY OF EAGLE ) 1.AND USE SUMMARY TABLE: (LOTS 1-8) The to:ego,f.g [jectcatton was ack,jewk,dwid bet,re RECEIVED N./.9,e ¢ F·.fl'' ~nt•*t 410 145- .1 -0.*.-.. d. 0(AD..2004 by - 21 1% •,4• : ·• t..·.i ·· .·· y P•:··6.ic 'tal (li-¢:,p': ent e,~u¢•9 1, e t>f<tecte•, of # '-• 1 ·,•1.·· ~'*,y : , h *•i •. & <c i•• I# 1->I n,··y.t~r,! .;1, E,~'- valier' MY Ck*,mibiroti expre# VICINITY MAP 4 *f t.'•tr.3 //0/ thm, 0•:,i •i' f ·:/I·'~.i, 09,~ 1he F//ni;nent rduct/n ,~ ,«'; J.,it,u· M.i•~ty * Lhe ni·., itil.:luta 1- -500 F:1- MAY 6 6 2004 F'er-;11,4. ticidi'-0,« and *eces'o'y ha V'¢Ane55 my haild and sed - P.'·':tted U... - 1·:.*!r-,0,0*y Un'#.9 Lait, p.:3/71/0 IL:Ny[ I 03+ 3/1.LL·P#0 'Jurs 6 Lti¢>i.r / *ttit ¥ el,4€H I F.Uy=4 I (>' LI:111*49 "4 16 Community Development - H Llf'TS 97;Air For¢12.5/ nr.'/·.t~{./i - 4.(40 Swere feet of t./ 1¢07 *fo per et MLIN'ji *•t 'OM ' 0 ft 1 .if, 4-,1 410• it:.·„ SHEEJ INDEX Ttid Platifted Uii! Ile#kiernefit an·: ine uts, /0,1,/1 *andards and de#tes are 011" 51<ft 1 Pr'Flut; 7-Al.f 5 A¥4, All 1 appreved fof the fites.,b4*?s>un o~ Lotl; 54.55.89 & 90 Bic*K 4 PlJO~ 0}ritinance 04 J TOWN CERTIFICATE - PER TOWN COL€ COVER SHEET SHEET 1 b¥ 81• Town Couned of Ihe Tu*,i of Avoit, County 01 E 443, St,110 Of ColoffM16, CARAGE FAP.par' Av.1 AP f - P£01 10*/ CODE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY SHEET 2 of Itie coutit¢ 01 Cagle. 54,41 11{1{* o·w?~1 5Fullt In no wi•¥ oy:gat€> 92 lown af A~'09 10: thig.. ...._...- day of .....~ . ., .- :,.,.,..... , 2004 101 tiling w}:t, 11,0 CIo*. and Recorder 50•#ACt. 44'4:lt;C AL'Al.Aati POSSIBLE PLAT SHEET 3 any inli,rove,niniti .114 ap imve 01 14, stle· plan by t,ia Terwn 13 a cerisent onby and ·· P, R Ton' Cell SHEET 4 SITE PLAN imy cocu,Filwilaticin ral#ittni; tki{*040. Wtal·,3 LOT tea.HAGE - Al€LA (14 n.) 402 154 UTILITY PLAN SHEET 5 H. ilot tri be /0//trued *& 11,1 lopeolot el tho loctinkal correctness of this plan ¢t 9110 LA}14,54-ArED OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT SHEET 6 WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL OF THE TOWN OF AVON: 1 . 11 W,l \ F >-2 4. p - ARE A (11. to Pf R 104.: CS.OE 5%·00, STOR, 4 ' AME.4 64 11 ) By; PER 1 0¥24 Cult X 'f Fole¢ A./. TOWN COUNCIL OF TH[ l'OWN OF AVON SCIDACKS - PER -··41: tr *. Lot./ 6-8 M„y ) 94/ K- Pklit #./. I I I ; - Reor ·~ PFR '0054 k .r,r Attest NOTE: rer· 091 .t fnad,e, rn.·1 .r•;t *t,d j ¢,22#,•81:*-4 ••11,ir< th« $ i<b,Jg.* Sit,di, Ilan /4.;t t; t<Il town Clork 44 * A.on Nunic,•al #Dede .ele,Oper,%:/ 01 api.ly , 2 I nATE· Ine. t. '7,vi, '47"'f."tlvi.cov j.99'L,$~" 0/2,·23r- *' '043 4,* , , 4 , 0 Z -- r, 4 a: to r D U Z x4 x 5 , 80% 4 -I . z 09 5 / 0 4 ./ 6-21'24*23* h <0<-~ ~ ~ ~ Z 8- 0, R. 775.00. LOI 85 1 0 L-290.00' 2 W -0 1 BRG-N 361)8'24- w 1.4 9..2/ ./ + I k ; .. 1 '' -- - ft,/ #.- -'r 1. - 0 0 . -- V. 9. P., w £ . , I V , ... ..t« /0,. K. ... ".6-,- 0.,-„., 4 - 5&&'1' ''- 0 - e .-h I # .... 34< 1/,4 .«1. /1.6.2,;:fE..1,¢,ri,jc·©G-€7 .- *-I -. -I +~ 0 2 + 0 9 W r. . / N WJ .-' > m 9 0 -* - 2 , i , - i -3..4- /450,401 2.,4/4,0> J >h.~5 '93\~ .·~..7-1'11 IZI..1-1~7*30.._ _ _- . ~*. , - k.v / 0 0, > · 1 44 i. 4&6* 2' AI· 4*·•f....2'071' - '...C. . w: , -/, ir - %*pfs** -35·~/*f"·52.'* ~ ~.41 3+--79-PRe.210- - ~4-'--" - ~~";*.,€-1 r. . t." 24k -· - -J L .«··.*,413: «.3954. U.».7 -C, 0 . - toi 56 0 0 /7,1-\-- - ~-:,- <13 Li.. -1.-/% r..r: 2 252: 99 7-n><54:Ns= 217-Z.1-7-n..7 - 00 , 4 to 1- 112<26 -6- . 4 ui . I - / - .1 .-.- '.*.- - 01 Q r. ... /rf:t.':I:*1;71.-1.-2-D:-F:63:,·-93„.2 ~~1~··~-3 t-:~412 ...1.. - . - *p- - Dlisc'247__~ _~ LE... 4, .*../ - 1.0.'f - 049·4618* 9.-,5.gIS 1- r . .. V · 1-5480 00 1 1-J'.37 '..1 -Ar- C 104-51.47' - .' . -#- :• .. /4. # A.~ / 0' OSUN LANE 1 -mi- ..2= =14 BRG-H 4548'090 E ' - -- L' r · / 50' ROW k 5 0718'42' I 12820' ..' 4·· ~/'• A 4 . 2- W . tr ' 1./ f,-9 Jaftifi.flufft-Rn:-zi.vit,.-0- -------__jpi~ A \ 4,:aQ... 1 .'ll-'. 4,4 4110• .... $......'...-# .P..*.-+ *: - I. '7»- I r., '. 'n. I , 2.. .-'...... .1 2.0-,-1 1 - " · ·" · 2. "~ ~1 N ~ r~V,-t~ -7- -- -- 2 - 4 *.- --WI--- A--I- inliM >.1 i WOPE. ivi. t.*.9 - 4 1.10 •A•#ir ' I 2 4 - I- AM - - -- e V' MEAS INV EL¥. 8480,7 ' W:AG F. / L.1, 34 76 + ; ' 5. .*... -- ,-9....W.%-,„-# .-I 4. .··: ~ ·:·/ . *us-n,t·priA#<,14 /*:4 -r. I W l - 1 a.,"·2·>rt fU/T . - 1.11- -h 64 . -1 -·6' -+ -·· in.Al rl') t '• /41·5 7·« , - .---- --- .... ---- - --- - -----44%'IL.-CiBIU?.237- ' U.- ...... * p ·, ' bil.r u ./ - 1 4 il - lf<ACT H ~- 4 '17*-*-: 17:7-- -#,-4-I.#jfi.,2. ------ -T*v-1 * - 53 -- 2.,= . , --- - LOT - ...,r41,4r . , 3 4 7 ·~ ' JQ- 4, . --*e.'. / -- 4 . .Ir ---3 1 3 - 7-9.2 .-' 'CO/7..,9.4:b.4-1 -41 --....,-,--.N ..... -f.. --9.-*-» .J * '~ -r *0- :t:13'4,·- 3» -4.h«.>tl-9.«. 1~~4~»-*~4.747 -3/.· 277 A bli€ A *<- . 14- 1.- - - - a.n=f=2·~f..Ac--2:~ 4-2 th.--973 9€E~:Vif4~ -j .-~24%*64~9~4TV s7rbin»· T;zll-* - - ..... I - 4 7-> » ~··, ·"Flf /,i '>. -*4- 1 "ok · „,7---·- ... //Titus!#AL Sf'/ER •,Al:HCRE /1-3 <4.Vt•, C,v ,«u ~ -30*E:-3~,~i~tyjv 31.bof:i#->-k,ik'/-·'.*~··: -· . ...; .·-1-~u,-32Ff:'14 I , ., d --1 - 4.1 - I - / k-4. : irr-*- .,-4.42·~--t··--2~ .. -.~.- ··. 9 t :m 9 1, GRAPHIC SCAt.R ~,•,1 : .Etime·-"»-1 ' .''FN it. IRACT H '... I, R I , ..1*£ V: 1 1 --I--4- Fixly· 04,'25,064 1 » / I. '1/r ) SHEET 2 'r. 6 L 20 t~ n¥,0 D< ,.r iant/,3., 0 r. - 0 Ddo Z t.) 0 - - .,Pe,# - - iti43ICZ':p·~y-U.tup~··· '74 ' -~9.-52· 3,-2%»14 /1 //.. . 1- 19;72.: h . .. 2 . »4:, Wt.Al IN¥. Ltv. 84&1.9 --%.-27334»~«311% ,wi- ~2·,2~~~1·1 -~#- r4-~2£31611 . t ·2014 : C 3034 1 4/a - . e n ... 9 03919 'NO,1 v 00*610100 dVWOOd01 •4 - 0 POSSIBLE PLAT j O TATESTERN SAGE DEVELOPMENT " 9 - LOTS 1-8, TRACT A, BLOCK 4 TWILDRIDGE - C 0 1 2 6 W Or) A RESUBDIVISIONf of LOT 54,55,89, & 90, BLOCK 4 WILDRIDGE 1 61 -6 Z '3 Town of Avon, Eagle County, Coloracio 1 0 9, 1 2-6 f \ . be . X. i V Z 1 - 0 f Z / 4 1 € i 2 , I i lot 98 1 . 84 I ...... .. 1 k / I / W. i i »21 77-73 ' 4 T. 146 ar . // \ 1 '~ ' b $ 0 ,.49023· ' O cti.t**Air ICL ~ /2 4\ 9* f \ J (11-288% : 3 6 0 m %' '. Z \8\ \~44,/ , ,- V 5192 09¥LDING --- _ .9 '. ->W...."A..'.- ..~ *" 1,„.~~"-».,W. .. "-*A- „.-, .„. -. -,« ,-~y- - A~ #.*-¥ . 43:41 \ 'y>>/, I .1 i /- SETBACK LINE mr) //1 -#W \ ... - 0% tp ..3/Lill' W 4 \ 1 F.y->h. ,/ 1 ma l(>7 7 ~i / - 0 92 Ar,I. . . 0.,41, 1 0 0 10 .ati- /,<0< -kk- :-----h== - 7-5' 51* DitUr,A,€4 »iD ))/ 1 1 1 43 ~: t ; t•0-)511'W LOT 8 . 1 N»6 - 11:.14.34 25' FRONY @litriNC i h 0 fy pr" 084 Ac¥„ 4 > 1 / '" SE10.1;K L#NE (TWN) 4 40' 4. # \ Ab" 77 r cip•st /u/3-W / . f + i 1 -h J 4/. 1 1 0 ,/ 4, 281 4. k + 41 vortiv + 9.. 7 06< 1.-47500 - i I *,4 $€ »43.31 5 ~~ 16 € 1 i \ 1 ...----- t 1*" --«' 0.3-NGO'0523*r 1 or 6 2 - 1.-L 1 +Ii Cy,••My 15 ; ~ , L.4 52 I MOB Ae- 7 ~7 21*1*7~31'37I p'~ONGSUN LAHE/ P /4..m -- . :*0 120* 4/ # '236 4/ »--#-/ 1-56314 f k 0 73 A.•I 7 l-20226 'PL N., 10' PEAW %,clt'(. TRACI A CH-%27'08-,2.-W i A·:49**Claj 1 i 9 \ 01" m 16 6 »-4500 O.41 DI·*Ati~U. 043.b•.4,41 trJE & , iP) 12 1 -- L·« 54 65 , 4 r one 4'~2114 -1- r.:3 ..7 -•L i , ur / 2,~~ - 4 - ./* / i. h ,--f..".I . 111/~ 6.9-40'1 5-%1 ' / 7~ - 00,546'42'13-w / ~. 4 i 4»51 47. . / M. //7 1 4. /7 R •375 00 p i .2% -44-45*2. , ."....'...'. I 1.31.72 --. - _ .4,3, ~ L #N.. 1 i f ' 2 1,·26#46' U.A. 3.4- a'...,RDE/49"52'Efj / ~ H-©45.00 I f 1.18,1 10' FAC}IT BU}Lbill. 0, ~ L-.34.26 SETBACK UNC (tj¥) jk LOT 5 CE-+41,4.-1. I 4/,9 L O#-314* alj Aer.0 ~~41 1 4 1 3 11 1 t! 1~ 1 '1 t; 1 - 'A, S RK€POSED KY ~1 i 1 - 11 1[-- -- - - ---lit: ;i i 0 j.. scwy: i *se,t•1 r / h 1 11 1 u 11 LOT 4 j., # *At U 1}21 il 1519 , t. 0.51 - .1·~ 9 4 1 11 1 2 - ~; ! ll IiI- -- l OT 3 0.67 A/.i .~. ~. 1 , ] 2 li *.- - - 11 ~ , 1 lilli M ..1·. l01 2 --- i (2 9 1 L .i . /4 I / h 1.67 , 0 111 4 -1 b- / '1}111111 LASEUzirr tr.1 0,73; ~ / .4 1 \ 1 1 2/1 ar ~ 2 L - K 4/ li f \ s cP: 43,22 -- 1 14 , i, 1,1 , - /ts, ) 1. r 1. 4,- ., 'ye• 1 lf.. N -tit Aer-( 9 1 ( t i 4 13·33*7 LOT 1 . -»,iz-~~~7 ~ 11 1 0 50 Au•, GRAPHIC MAII , 1,14. 04,1.4.4,4 --44402«LE- 11 i . , 0>-0.4 1 i I.E. 9/:f -4-C , -47 / i ... 9 40 1/ I SHEET - P 3 Wargw™«134 "l •T,4 /00.it.CU- 04 2 ,De Ill"?A'* £20-*Att.-OLd 'N<DAY 00*80100 .30 NMO1 '30(31bla-11,A € 0 J J n f 01 0 0 ' b j 03 111 -(N. W 00 N 4 f Wet // , 11 1 1 Z 74 I ./ Z ~N h :. 1.1 0 A / ' ./ f i 9 , Z N . 5 , ' \ \ 0 9 .\ Lut t,8 i LEt 93 . 3 / 5 '=co- '--«.. ., 1\ 2 / t./--- ': i 'lly 10 ./1./.' 2 . / , /32. t 7/ 5 * --- 1 : g '**ff:' AGG, L .1- ..LD- .- 2 /7 .~.27'.1 5. 10; 1. . / 4 11 --~W- - -,-*Il . I.- -,--I - ' ./ 57 e/' , . 1.,1 , ., ./ 'V ' J ' - . 1 .'. . .2'., AW-, + ,~--I -I · -Il ' / 111 4 * 1.· L- 1 1 0, 0 tri S , ~, , ,~4+ , -· .I~ 0% 5-,~ -4 -~Ii -~i-35*FTPJR'ISS-Zib- ~.Lp-4 -. L r.- <.2. - -17 ~-94- -: -- 2-£kIST#*<; AS,urIALT . -- r Tr-3 ---- r- * 1© - j Ill/1 LM 38 * , i i i l tn Q 1-1 1 ; 1 -C #kin-€r<1£62*U.-31;722 ,( -CLLE .~·UL -77-2.- . i et 52 0 - --A + A - L ' 1 . . "P ~-%" - L -, # PROPOSED C [*.P ~-[.41'CH ' / Pl . U I %·. i -·D·.''7b51 3--Lk<--/ SWJX b- - - ---31 ~i.. '. ~1 \ 3 --- ./fv in--1-' -fr= rrix-r, .»:30/,i,~10> 0-· ~~· ~:piL.32~69----a.-s·--:.-£-ov_ .4-i~'2726-z--117«f---f:~ 449 -/1 I k. ' .4.- 1 6 r .*# /** 1 - I#. . $ L effc*•OSED /9,14 Y -, . 4 ·' - '«47··I-5312»'- -- - -2-~-.---1~2.2EEEFIT-irp -212*~"~.-Urt-I.4 2-·-·r,-'7·2·~-1~. -LE-1--~-2 3·, 2--1 {t .--r'.2,2-3---...79-LU:.242-142-f*-Eftmgbitti, i - . 7 -- 6 -·M - ---1'232~Q·*.~L_ -94=- _(·l,Iq.,p~~..4 , -1 , r -.-1 ' -1---wa-* - 4% # *- Let 53 3 1 . *w . : . I. . , ...6. ' .. .L. /. ~'- c Y* - . 9.63 A.,4.1..- ·.-·· -- -- 'A- -/ ..9.... .- + 3-1/Je- - -: - ri.. , I -- , - *......... 1 4 -1 ..7-1 1 Lk.. I --- -'W#-- .72. y :.i ·li 3·Morz, 422134 131-42~.2~Jiff.~9~..1~- ,~k~~<. ..h,fr~-,f~A...~t=.'tL~// P -i"--1» 2=.-- 2,23. .2.-~7* --:.2-3 Trz 22 1 Hz*>-TJTZ:$*TZ L LIE·1 / l i ikACT~i $ , oll€/ 5/•21' , ~.- ..1 v '7 4.442.2/ -- 2- 722 1.-t'~~ / 408 03-0~5 GRAPHIC SCALE 'A W- I . '.-*$ j - . . ....».3-3-7-446.GE- -9 -1 DAIE. 4/2U/24 : 44 4 .4 f -I. --„1 » t 1,1 nk. 1 - SHEET 1.-6 . .. A -6.* I ... I * >13018 *06 101 004&10103 *NOAV *30 lk:tallM NV-ld 316 , rjf:·21•9'*•47-76%4_93#3 93>1 4•N £4'UNCM" 21.57 AL• 0 ..1 J f j '9 0 6 :/ / 1 h » .4 1 / 4 e . 0 1 A - t'' 1 EN 0 ' 1 j OW 4 r . 4 ES h 4 , . ·0 1 3 b , 441 / 4. 1*GNU: ARE I . A 41*11 4,-032 7 ' .321 1 9 M .7. \ , 1 I , *,4 Lf 4~ ~. ~ ' ~ ,~3; /41 0\ ' i 4 / ' '~I:....'I. - tj Ent 41'. 8. [1*, + - /4- /1, -\910/ \11\j 14$ R *i -CR t.#,f - r••911.,1 EliN ~, / 5 I.>\ h 7' e: I.<~// 61# f \ ¥\ 1\ 1 O X , - + , - 41>$5323/r / \H\ , - J m 35 . \. f I. 40 0, i j 'mt 1 4 -1 kt\ A. 57 LOT 7 * 1 / IL t:Z o 0.92 Alls a * 3 C.,1 9 / gz it:il '% DU) 0 i . «<h /,7 LOT B u . · i 111 J id i / 9,4. Insm'*2 6- Dip .' 1 */#R '14€ I 4% 4.1; w i\. .4 r 1,44 // w 147 4 N i i 'l ./ reogro tic•ta N 1/ 3 2 0 1 \/ •,44,1''Af (np) , , flpt il .0.6 - L.1 52 1 f I 22 /h ..7 / i \ 1.65 Airci PAC)POVD *AT¥.R .4 1 ~/- SE•t·.xf l,YP'/ 1 g *4 TO 1 11¥; tING / j § rAOP€~SE D a. Dip WA ILK Ul IE '~142 . 1 . h YDI¢Al" ASS,•*b>J -<f /< ··· · %261 .945/ ~~ rin / REWO~ At4D~~~~---2--i-ic·E ~3:-'-6-»co~,~-- 14 10*19,1,03 Pill h 6 ,/- HYDRANT f H ·026 -*. %*v#* m % , ¢ f , Iii 11 -7*FIrrizi=rE=-~ - 1 ' £41¥NS SE'*R M 0-4 1 f'MN·0 1,4.3 1.L - 1/ / PV g,~ L.2 94 7,> 9 , I #p 223:NZ; LOTS 24#OPE'l D ·k W R if j I \4 /1 1 4 0.70 /9., ~ y#o.t -q'41 '7- --~-' 94 N li :11 9,61% a \'1 < f.... 1 l |% 71 M 51 11 + 44- -4 Extmt.. ·St¥,:R MH 6-3 1 · 1 - El 1 R,11 - 54€•, 2 4 0 WN - 445.1 11 i 1 1~ } 111 \ --- 1 r:rak-t Pitt'*'05€.0 SEW#- f 2 1 .- '16'VE£ C "P) E 45 TIN¢ fE*R , 1 ,/" WAIN { ™9 LOT 4 * - p t -» - -ln --Ii i o .1 Aol. 11 1 11 L•,~ !*3 3 L peoposco :48 8 6.0. - 4-1-=--- 2.--1.,I> 4 7--- -4--- / f „-,-- - - .- -*- ..- ) 1-lft&-'.$4--Sk-=--\ 1 1 / / 1 0.-'. rj 067 A... --2 el© i' 1 1 A ir- \Rl•4 - 843 7 21» r / LOT 2 li , i b 1 -\ Et:STING SIWER WH D- 3 / Iii 049 'll- 11 1 1 ..1 - 4.A, / LOT 1 0* - 0 1 It 11 1 16*tt *. 1 i / / JOB : 03-034 $ DAIL, 4/20/0,4 ' GRAPHIC SCALE ~ --10- 1 1 / ---1 < 1.1 F.El ) 0 SHEET . , / ./4 - 4,; n L / 5 NIa33 ION3 NIONVFY 00¥BO1OO 'NOAV t »9 5101 - . i. , . ~ ),tl Ahli I·or?44-y.9.7.137)4.tri.I UT.,rn ..AN. 04,2,7»4 2.23 S W I / 1 / 1 , 0 4 1 I * 1 m 1 c. i ' I It I . , . t *1 1 ot + 1 . 80 4 h , \ f 1 . ... 0 'P f zn ' h - I , /, 01 LOT 88 / LOT 58 '' h € .4 /4 \ 4 \/ / / , 1. 4 , c C - I . 0 /* - -- I N i ....1 £ 0 2 , Nf 9,2 L /:·/ lot 89 / , 8. AC ~: . C' 11 't 4 1 2 0 1 *. **r>/'Acpos,rr: i in 5 :% L. 4 1 4 0 \ \ AT 5 v 12 ,- / /-2111 C 1,1,1 ' t I 1 8; > 0 \ . . 4 + //14 44314 ./ / .. . + . bu , , \ / I , \ < 1 ~\ 7 t 4 11 11 £07 8 -- . -0, C / . ,.,42«% .k O.84 Acre.3 -1. '~,kl'; / 0 r~ i i 00 z 10 a I OT 94 A-i W to 1.- · \ . LOT :90 \10.41\ D.2** All.3 ~ ~ ' ~ . 0 < 4 0- *. 4 ' d t I - - IL I I #f ~' C LOT 6 to g 1.08 Acrri 1 OT 52 1- k OC ' 1 3- j Of ir T~1 j? 1 1 A'J[ ' \ i -- 9 i ' 50' ROW . *-' t . en ,...... . 7: tri-%72-2-%---** \ , •in 1 1; 0 d - r /. 7- -\\ V->.-~€~: . ., '1 N t. LOT k \~, .: 11 ,11 - - - - W! LBI 2'5 /1 / 4 ' '-2. . L. 1 W.. .1 9. 0.75 Ae" '. 11 i i ~ ¢ 1 '1 1~ I~ LOT 54 3 C i i., 7 3, ~· ·~~-«2. 2.-~~-·1~.- !j!~1- fill I ¢ 1,1 1: TRACT it ,· -4- ~ ~ , loT 53 .,. 77-1»..42 ..4 1..:,1,-111./>34=«..¢!.3 42:2.- - -' lii d. , / '1 4 --I------ 114 , 1.1 1 . . 6 1/»NOUN : nu·%» . : ·: 2 I .- ----- . ._--1 .16 i ) It . I --2 .. '· I '. 08;,Atf,/ '' . · r.,„ I ..9 41«-1-1-.Cli.! 9 J--ht.4f...2::.23 0.! Ff/· ' + 1.-1: .....\4 £ .. 1 . 7 k. ' L-: b,d:44: :: .irg .. 2* = 'f /4·\. \ 9 U :T Llj.: 4·..:.....2 f. : I 4 ''.3 EXIS TING OPEN SPACE 3.33 ACRES 4 / GRAPHIC SCALE f . TRACT H - 1 1 PROPOSED OPEN SPACE 3.33 ACRE5 PA R 4/28* i .1 8 36 f nt ,Fer) e---1--- 1*14/ 0 40 M SHFF Dll ©Nlk:133NION 118IHX3 33VdS 069 Ld Ottl -02 'NOA - 1 1 444m/045 ~U.W'HINCE<W tEl ru44, mm 4[}F W L -_-- ~ 2 m il U. 1 }R=,1 mm -~%14 till I 11 11 1 BE -fl I 1 - SHEET INDEX Speculative Residence - Topograph < MI- Survew mpp design shop All Site /2 All Lower 4 Main Level Fk/or Plas Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge m. upper Level Floor PIm 4 lod Flin 34999 Highway 6, Unit G201 Avon, CO 81620 ,•e 3 Mst 4 Perth Elevatiore 'el mt 4 South Elervilore PO Box 4227 Edwards, CO 81632 tel - 970-390-4931 fax - 970-390-4931 RECEIVED JUN 0 8 2004 A Community Development DRB Sketch Plan Submission June 01, 2004 039 18 03 'UOAv eSP!]Pl!.M '£ >Polil '9 401 - eouep!secy eA!10#inoeds . RADI US = 575.00' RADIUS = 275.00 DEL TA = 14"JO '26" DELTA = 53°56'41" ARC = 143.25 ARC = 2158.92' -- ~8380.0 83833~ T,ANGENT = 72.00' - 1~ TA NOENT = 139.95' 1 1 \ \ CHORD = 142.88' ~ CHORD = 249.46 Wi'I-li)Pr,1( , \ 1 1 In .- 1 Z ) ./ E i f (_) /1 1-) 1-7 A O i 1 8371.8 L.. / 4.3 1 1 (Li a B 592 BRO = N74°00'53''E VE= (50' w. 0, 9, ) \ \ 1 01.-71 1\ \ C -x©00.6 1 -«3 - *20 85 2 1 1 4 2286 8381 8 ~ \ 8377 3 > UBB 8369 1 \ 1 - - \ 1 \ 1680 CPI- - 1---,r----1 - 1 -1. ----- 9 BO- 362.6' J /AT.0/4 - 0 -1-ke'll·I - I.69' - --1- -\ LA 8366.8 i \ --1 \ /7- /-.--2« ~. - I \ +55 1.61\ 0 -0--8358' --- - K -- - $ 0% -- - NONS) 4 \ \ Q BOAL -8959 - -- - - -- - - - - .9 - 8364.3 1 \ 8370 6 1 42 .O- - I. - * - - ~ ,1-3.CM- 23619 -42 1\ -- _ 8367 4 1 / -- - -- /11 I.r - 1 \ I \ 1 / - /9.- 1 B.OA - 8959- -- _ -- I / - - I - - - /// 21.Lk-- a,I 22.3+ l b.96 1 / \1\// - // //// - // - 773_ «- - %- - - 15*A - 2>3517 - / T.2211 19%2/ 1-37~ '-- 8365.0 1 1-1 2'-I-Rk- 1 - \ / / I V .-°~-2/..- Ii. M--i --1---5 ~ Ihz. 6 ..1-Fi . 1 =.--:-,·- 11-% \ / / I - 1 \\ , , . --- . - - .....445 ii - -9- ,- -- --- 1 . - 4--- 23577 gr-- I / nes:t - I - 71- -- - 1 ff--r- 1, 1 1--- / - '.Allo.' - ---- - - --L - - - 6 0 /1 1 -- 21%14- . % 4...2=Z _ .% &Wn,Grente , _-_ _____ _- 5 - 83502 2-6' ' : / TI' Exls,1.4 er™je 836 --------------- EL - Ia444' 1 \ \ ~2:4IECI~~~ y-- it ag. SLOPE ./E / / 1 - /21 ' £ F-linE. 1 ~ _ & - ' \ \ - _ _~___-_~ Z - 7 ~ =o"grJ---fl:'..*Th - 1 - - i - - - #. 1.Ing Graic 1 / T----"i 4 - _ - _--_ _ - u B --,h Existi~.er=le 1,([Stl** --8950*- -Mil -- I I - - 1. 1- - - 1 ./ . 7E:»0'- 7 1/9 E-826,15F / l r I EL - 6*«9017 - %.~~% eG, 1 1 \-- ..91/ / -----6- - / 8 - :6481 6,12[™. - - - --___ ---- - Ra -MEE& *eraae_ ,_ . Jx .isU,*r~*-__/ ixist* GreBRE <M d ~ __ i _ 699%*- 7 1.t- - 8/46•0 • - Ar= 8 -IMI/ - /- /1 - -1 1 ~51/ . EL - 0/7,-4 ty - 11.- 4-2--- - - -71 -763.6.Fr Jit. 0 - .r - - - SS ~ i /3.. ---0~~· 1 - --- \ 47 --tz=whi--/ 1 1 --- - - -*130.. - 8351 - -31 ---- ---- *k.:-=5379 t -- - ---- -- t*yl-LI \M-- i _ M -- - - __~ __ _ L.- - - /1 *Rwr -____*:,-t#:f:. '2.- '*I/__ __ ---N -- M -- -K-_ .1-~ *Isti,ic? Irade .hadit,ng *fu . s 4 681'4 Grade .--- | .b~IsLIngwade 4__3470&__ ~ -- ' ELI p#3/4 + E>,Ist,•4»·ex,e ~c - _ _ - _ •h exidlm crade -- --- --- - - % ' _ _ : ----ea-=I.ge£ ~~ I F -- ... - < EL- 88353 / --- i -- -- t-2332•-ik=-2227~1-1-Ve-=i-1 L-- / - - -- 'll·Er-lt,7-- r 0,7 bi/*4 * -- -- --- I -„-- - - --- - £ -91% \ X _ - - - 58•Istlnq /ride ar 442 -- w - ----- -40«~f_ i[ ---- --JEL-1-7... \7 --5 - ~·.-- x -i-1~~-~·riwwz \ f n - 8335-•F- -- \ _. ... --_----LOT 5 ---- ------- - --- k -- / ..~ J**Btll ern*- - P ELI 83381 - 3 7.50 \7-=1 7-4-_ ------- --- -- --- ----- -- --- __----- -------- _------ ~ ,__- --- --f-------------- -0- ---- _-- ----- -- ---- rr - 15.ue pilte -- - ~i--- $ --1- ---- -8330- - -- -- I/ =Re Sk.h r. 06/ovol _ (-- -83309-{1 ---3-3_3 -11-1 - ---/--- 1.632 ACRES - -- / - ---- ---- --r- 1 - - I ____ - ~~- *% i- --/ / (17 -t -8320---- -- N-I- - -- BITE PLAN SUMMARY SGUARE FOOTAGE 01 N - ___ __ -____ __ - --- ---~ Job r,urreer: . - - - CURRENT ZONING - DUPLEX FRED[IXNCE SUMMARY - ------I7ran by; --- --_- NUMBER OF DY€LLING UNITS - 2 BUILDINe HEISHT ALI.OVED - 35 Checked ty - BUILPINS HEIGHT PROPOSED - 34'-8* Each Unit orawing ntle: BEGU\RED PAFJ<Ne VA£:26 - 3 PER UNIT - B TOTAL- Garage 615 sq Ft Site Flan \ - 1 LIP--\ 1 RPOPOSED PARKING SPACES - 8 Mechanical 152 54 ft I 1> PITS[TE FLAN - - ---- - - - - AREA I % OFF SITE >40% SLOPE- ~--80510----- - ----------- Laver Level Living 1.302 54 ft -------- ...12-,/ SCALE 1-=,C~ ~ - -- -_--_ Main Level Uving 1.064 64 Ft Upper Level L»ing 1.3-10 Dqft U J .- -,7.- - Sheet Numbert -- - --1 - -1-1 --- _ ____ _ Total Living per unit 2·326, 54 ft - - - Total sq ft per unit 4.506 sq Ft O 1 -- - -- - NORTH - -------- Total E3uilding Project Al.1 -- 41 ---------- - - - x - Total livir,4 on site 1.472 sq ft 2--1 i n„ -_ -- -1-- ----MW -i - -p~li~ --- Total 54 Ft on site q.012 5,1 n 'dolls l.18!sep ddul eouep!9831 GANDinoeds 111\ 1\ C -f\-1 1 1 1 1 il 5 1 1 2 i i te>lue'm 16~-J , 2<7-7 27.3- , ./.7 ' I·.· · , I·-0* 2 £ .-O- . 1.-6- , ...7- 7 J C I L . -1\01 O 399 C -.% . , 01.- -9 - m *28341 - - [1 ~ (· 132~r l 2 i - .-IU- - a 4 2 Vi K 2 4 s-'--11 ·I \ R i .1¥.. O 6 E-B 11 IE 3 U 0 L. C - %310 0 i? CD 4 m . nnon b glj l ~ 1 9. •h...LE /1/EL · 0 [Ji~ d V./.2 BED- 618*L& - - i' -4-'... k (D - - -0 0 0 0 1 a k .POLE LEMER. 1....All 1 mi *le-RiA r EL - 8357 - - - - .....1· - - - ~ -0000 r-- - - Cl \ 9 i - , 04• e,Vt 1 1 E 1 1 / , .. . 16.-07 - . 11# 84» . . 0/ . .2-0- I /02# .-0- I. * 66.-4 1 le . 66.-<7 1 1 1 - 1 1 rnMIDDLE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ) SCALE: 1/8 . 1'-0- ./.7 , .... re ,/ 16.-0- 1-2.q . 16'-28 . 6*- 1 1 1,·-cr 8UO- 9. W , 1 ----1-T- - ----- -- - ----- -- ----- -- - --- - ---- 4-1- ~- -- - -- ---- -- - , 11 1 r --- 9 * .. I 1 I .1 - - -- 9 MEG+IANA F----- -C -9 r=-- 1 I I--IL===i \ i =saft I = \ 7 iesue Date 40=E 1 1 0.™ 1 -. 1 L____ 11 -1 EmeN!!26 1 --- rilly- , r - 1 4 -- e - u ~ 7~ rf- I n ML ~/ - lilli' L 'EDROCM 130,4# A /1 1,29aA_ -_ . __. - mfee!21 - 9 -~~•·~~2~--4~~ - j'~:113/1 -- --- --_ ----- 1. b ' : -i ' I ' - P..O Job ru,ter: 04.5 $ 21 -e339-15' r .6 1-0,€,"2.& - .i '. r 9 Checked t¥ 4 F EL'- "C rfE!2 Dr-, by: mpP -=b=rir--- / r * EL - 833.-15' - I. DECJ. Praul, 71/1. f. h Lcwer 4 Middle Level 1 rj-- ---- - ---- 4 Floor Plarls " 13 1 10 1 i 1 , Sheet Number· , 187-47 . r,-0 4 14- .t ~ pe . 4120. . 16-0... 55·« 58·-O. 1 - A:2.1 ~1 LOMER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN ~ SCALE: 1/8- = 1'-OP 1£6~-0 #\45!H 666~£ 05ppplIM '9 MOOIR '9 101 -4. 613 -411 221-0. , 6.-0. 1. eouep!sehl DA!+Dinoeds 29 18 03 'UOAv '21-'t 1 4 1 1 { €'t 1-- Mi: : " / ' | I 1 :4 1 & Mi , i - ---4 C Z x66 2• i i 7-9 -1 4* 111 1 .0 11 00% 0-06 12'-6- -7 / 7-- --1 -4__/1 · 20 2€k 9 + 1 1 -/--L 4011 -4 ~ 3 1/f·· 1 U 7 - 7 E--------- --1------fb ----- 0 1 1 \1/ 1\ I -1 1 1 \ 1/ .h T O. RIC>se '54-/31·r-+ .:r 41 T.O. RIDGE 11 ' EL + 2,3-160-2 1/7 ~, I $ ~fi ~ZZI/,I. /3 71£#pifli-129 9<\ 1 : i T o. ROSE || 7 a - 8316-21/7 H 11 ~ i -_. 1 - -1 r, r I ..0,1*001=Les j 74-- 11--L--- -"1----- --- ---- --13 --1 -- r« ~ -1----=A.-------- C 'p EL - D.lr-2 W 4 d. T O ROOF f.seE 8: P EL - /31.-2 1/7 ------219--------4.--\- ---- ------ i ~f- 49%*,9- 2 . 1 4-61 j 111. 1 0 1 43 T O ROOF ED®E I 4 0--------- 2 7 ~-0'M-81,~ 7-61- - 9-- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1111 .2-9 2-€£- 1 ,// 1 1 ./-1 ROOF PLAN \ 2 ) SCALE 1/6- i ,·-c· , 58'-0- 16'-/b 58... , 0# I ' Xy'- I 27-0 2.. 2 1- 8.-c· , =22·-c- , *'~- ~ ' ~~'~- . 11' I , ./ 7-0- :)-2,; T./ ... . 7-<7. , 81-0- . 7-0' ,·r 7-0- I I 11'46- -9 - 9 - L ~»t_ luuu-3-1:_ _ Ir--~1 ' . _ ..~2/Wil I i Issue Date -- · - -- - /rtl - - -- - -- 0/. - --- . - - - ... Sketch /- 06/01/04 11 - n <1OE701~Ini~ ~ 61940--411 . .1. ~ 01 1 IR 1 LIC=-[3 1 . mz-4 loriA , 4,;PPER Lea, -. 1 [t===i=7 1 LE .4 b i . 02650 - 1 ~ EL- - 03~ ~ 2* -3 3 .-i ~ 46€MI ¢40£ m=] 80121£.2 223921 12*.2at& e~I2Mg21 11 -= rip 1 LOFT 9 ~ Y·, - - - akir- ..Job number 0464 e Cra.. t': ..P 2--1 -- rl 2-3-7-1 /72.L-- '. 4 0,ecke/.p 1 1 1 I Oraping TItle: Upper Level Floor Plan 4 Roof Plal 01-e . 27<7- .· 84- 5. ./. , 22-C- I 'Cl/ :.<7 , Sheet Hunter: ee'-0- .... 1 A2.2 rr)UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN \ ) SCALE: 1/I~ = 1·-O- E l D-920£6 J EL - 0316'.2 1/2' ~ I - .// lili 4LGe , ¥="9 - -Ill A £ !u '9 AD,V\48!H 6664£ eSPPPI!.M '£ Moolg '9101 ) I 'dows US!sep ddlu eouap!Seal GANDinoeds 029 [9 00'UOA¥ ii ' 11 E li --! 1 - -- r- 01-97 1 -1-- « - 220~01 -1- - ----1 2- 1- 1 - 1 - x CO 6 4 *[1- 111 .2.=:t : 11 11]11 2- 2-ewee f-,0 4444#04 6,4 .~ .~. A 1 1 '05¢80 - Avy,5-711 1.-#+ 1 \% . Il,d-5 -22%21/. 1 1 1 ! £ 2 3 -fIEr»"BAHK~ _ 2 0 - 1 :122&+ 1 11 C& 1, 1 M 4 . ! 31- (D 1 -r~l cull p I - ~ W 1 2 1 5 -~1 ---- 111 fl 1% f~ * F 11 0 11-000 _~ r_-til--1-1 111 &1447.d E- i 1-1 - e-.9!,=„ - 11 -- Ill- 1 a E Ill - E-7 -7 --1---if-t--1-_ 1_--11 _1~2.-12/.0~*_ 1 1 1 1 1 B 1 1 , 1 i 11. 1 1 1 1 ~~NORTH ELEVATION - SCALE- 1/8- = 14- 11 1! 11 11 1 1 __ >*5) r-4- _ 2 ___ _~____ t r-T ' -/.. f.1 " f€· ISSUE Die [1 '1 1 - PRe Sketh ./ 06/0./. - ... [-4 1-¥1- - - 11 - i 1. -- 1 111- 11 _lot r~mber D.a Dre,4,1 by: mpP \N _ -1,1-:-0 _ ____ __ -_ 0-ecked ty ! i i Drawing Title East 4 North Elevations Shee'ber (~) EAST ELEVATION A23.1 SCALE 1/I- = 1./ eouep!SeN GANDinoeds 05PPPI!M '£ MOOIg '9 101 X9 8 OD'UOA¥ ~1111111®11111"~FO~u~qi~mill,11 d *&992 1 1 1 C 21* : : 302% -1 1 :11 +22=%7 1 - /1 1 -1__ -~~~- -1 1 , M -1.IM7 ¤---isik~: O 1 0 3 4:€20 i 7- -- T - ¢ , 9<L~- - _1 - --- , - --_ -21-4-0 _ __ - 1--- RU¥24 - - -_ - BO-- O _ 4 V i ------ - | --- 3!L --1[-1!7 1 -I' -, 77 Fir--n -\- +2234 - --- 3 Lt 1.11 JIL ·52 -20 £ - ------.- J 1 1 DIn 'nI] * ~ E[IE 1*-m]1111[ me-*-imm E.*9]111'1111'11=Jift-m'110 L. L. 4 1 1.-It 1 1 - Z-- -.1 v i p 17 1 1 2 /-21 L _ L.L_ IjUnilnlm~ =4*kE[11111 - 11. -u - 7» --F-- Fl «x SOUTH ELEVATION 429 SCALE. 1/8-. 1'-0- & / -0 35 26 0 90 (D MR 11 1 1-1 /1 att# 07 -3 < J,·41 1 11 11 1 11/ 111 1 44rm» -1--f-, 1-+26 --13- . III 11, 5-0. ,FO 5*-O. 1.Ot --==*r-<6** -y /1 IIi - - Issue Date 1 1 (=uvlh-- - 1 E- -- Ir. 1 ORB Sket,h F•'- 06/01~34 f / ,11111 Elz 1 L -=4_7 i f.Tu. ,#f I 1 Jot, number. 04<75 Or-1,1 & mpP 171! 1 1 1 1 1 Checked by: DravIng TItle: FNest 4 South I 4 1 Elevations Sheet Number: 443 P'IEST ELEVATION AS.2 I 'dows ualsep ddlu eouep!SeN eANDIn un '9 A MLAH 666,E - 1;OA pro¢ 05 a 1- 60£30- NEIGHBOR BULDING au:z*E ~ LOT 25 -73/4/If- 1 9 16 ¥mdtdb d... LOT 22 442\ A // i \ PHONE ZONING INFORMATION , 3 4.-, U J \ LOT 24 BLOCK 1 WILDRIDGE 1¥ PEDESTAL / L Lt 1 f ~~ LOT SIZE .39 AC 8216 8214 8212 S 89.54'56" E 169.74' 8210 ~ ~ 8208 i ANON 16,380.9 SF 7-- Juv~ - IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE A 69 94\ -1-140 -- 0 -0 MAX 8190.45 SF M \ \> \ 03 1.DING .4 \\ FND. PIN k - MI 10.Cr 1£D PLASTKC CAP BUILD[NG = 2,642 SF ~,j.6 ' - ---_ - _~__SEmAa,~ IS 5447 DRIVEWAY = 2,BOO SF \\ -\1.41 ELY. 8205.8 PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS LOT COVERAGE 33% 8217.1 Prci'0&/0 \ -P=--7 2 291 1 My % >OJ 5,442 SF Coo.-60. . ./ --0 \ BUILDING HIGHT \ 6 ..04 smwL 1 i ~~ 'LSit· 41,162- 35' MAX 217 1 eet> $ »»»UP 1 1 90-18 4UA<2 . st~~~Fu ~, 4 - 34'9" PROPOSED \ 5 A-C#·04 x 30 2. ,-V - EDGE OF PLO¥ED \ </1422 - 44---- -# 8210 ~;gli~ FORLO'r 21 BLOCK 1 SHALL NOT EXCEED 20% OF THETCTAL U.1 0 0 :123--- LANDSCAPED AREAPROV]DED 10,975 SF = 67% OF LOT. 1 2~ LANDSCAPE AREA OR 2,195 SF ~~r 1,; 1 82,8.8 .·.·-... ·i*-*:i--:/ .*--------:-----*.:-· --·--. - -,- -6-IA r----gl---~: --- - 10.OL_. - SPAY AREA FORSOD t4O6 sp CL. S u~7 SF D R o . -#4 do \ -1-r..... .. -- .- ~ 1 1 4 --1 irr~2754 A.- 1! --,1 -I- DWELLLNG UNITS -U 322 _i__*-+~-4- . 8212 2 DWELLINGS ALLOWABLE ---- 4 ': 1-I ~ -d 1, - - ' ~~ ~ - ·· 1 - --- I - . .-- - -1 b 2 DWELLINGS PROPOSED 1 Z dz '.I-,4 4 --- 1 1,1 r . LU _,D 0 - / 1 Lt - -44- - - 8-17004'40- ' I I, .~- -% 1,1 -- -- 3 8214 0 -f, 1 LOT 23 1 1 -4.- .TOP OF R,oeE• 825125 .. -... 4 1-- AM L==96.87 ; Top OF R,Det . &258,25 2 A gl i -r 6.4 - '' ----1 < fs C LEN=96.51' 1 61 11 11......4 , ..4 9 1 BRG-N 08026'54' ~ f --.1 1 --~·---~1!!81-~' fiu===~1-~~T~ 4 Ft-1 .) 3 SPACES REQUIRED PER UNIT | J PARKING 1 i I - -7 -- % 2 05 1 1 4 1 1111~ -* 8 3 SPACES PER UNIT i r -- 'SNOW STORAGE I 4 1%019: -- 1| i |qI -* 1·-7 , EAST UNIT 320 SF -tr-_,49-t- 1-r-----_a: I -mia 834 i L--.--1 1114.-= WEST UNIT 320 SF ~ 67% 10,975 SF LANDSCAPE \ PROPERTY LINES=LIMITS OF CONSTRUCIIONSITE DISTURANCE L ---299-i#-4~2-~~~T.(~t \~k¢:.-1.-7-n--7-.7----74*=Id-re \8216. , 1 ':.- ...3 -1>...0,~ *4.: h -. 1..il BUILDING ADDRESSES • 1 CONSTRUCTION SIGN TO BE PLACED ON SOUTH WEST CORNER Of LOT. EAST UNIT TO HAVE ADDRESS ON ENTRENCE OABLE. Revisions: WEST UNIT TO HAVE ADDRESS ROCKBY DRIVEWAY AT ENTRENCE - EROSSION CONTROL 1 -0'S SILT FENCE ON NORTH & EAST PROPERTY LINES i HAY BALES SHALL BE USED AT DRAINAGE LOCATIONS ALONG CITY BASMENTS 8216 U N 00005'05" E \ SLOPE MANTENANCE, DRAINAGE 9.56' 1 & SNOW STORAGE EASEMENT - ------I -. :1\ ,--0-' 711=14.CAP 10.0------ , 7--r~ \ I LS 5447 L---18214 \- ·11->d-- V 8221 i _ _=[2~5790»'h---1-- - --- :„EZELL-______-s 69054 56~ - - ----- i. 9 ,/- r------ I- 1 1:44£024_9 1 -4.4 03-- -* / 8222 STUB FFTS' ASSORTED GROUND 9% \ 4\V Ec-20-3 1 9 7- 1 \ SIGN (821* _24- ft:-I@RX-537:~ZX;~~1~211.5 RECEIVED ~-1.81-Ell'Ze~t '~m,~ 9-9 /82.3(0.4"Q~~:<Pla~4778~~~ ~1~ K 91 |~| NATIVE GRASS BOLT FIRE HYDRANT: 822133 8216 8211, 8214.7 8212.7 ~ JUN 0 7 2004 Fr771 SOD AREA/ fEDGE OF L J SPRAY AREA =D Community Development SADDLE RIDGE LOOP ~ 2" min. caliper aspen 20 total count (VARIABLE WIDTH R.O.W.) , 1i ~ 6 ft. min. evergreen 8 total count , ~ Date: 1/26/04 ~ NESI_lkALI RAST UNIT ~ ~ Existing vegetation UPPER LEVEL 1095 9= UPPER LEVEL 1255 9= MAIN LEVEL 1203 9/ MAIN LEVEL- 1303 SP GARABE LEVEL 124* SF aARASE LEVEL IBM SF Project No: ~ Drawn~ - 1 -------- EXISTING TOPOGRAPHIC SITE PLAN TOTAL PEST SIDE 303,5 SF TOTAL EAST SIDE 5162 58 NEW TOPOGRAPHIC SCALE: 1"= 10' Checked by: 0 m Alne „9 L andS ON01 CO.Re&,· ..r <;13 0/f ..4 11.-111. 22 - - - : Aat + : 2'x2' 2'x:2' MEGH *T.015.\006' 68:3' 93'-4. 63 3, 2£ .11-\ 1 \ & 1 1 11 - . 180-0. , .9 1 1 1-. 4'x4' PASHED LINE OF MALL ABOVE - 2'€40 / h. 1,/ E.- 1, 3~ R ® -.-71 ' 15'xe' b \ T .1--11 - 1 ~BEDROOM I X 0 0 e Top OF SLAB 5 | 1 1 1 - b 82185'=102' 1 IEN=Ry, 1 L_-1_f-1.3 \ m-Jj -+ Ii---Il W 9·- W-0 2'x2 2'x2' --0-19 -T ®TOS. = ioo * leARNME D o 11 1 CONCRETEf ~ 222+ = PATIo Z In 1- eT.05.= 102' 684' c. 1.1-1 21 - T 9 Fr-Lf U U ,-I I jFAMILT RM. C lili 01 R 9 | ~Al·ill.rjRMJ |~| LIA =- 3 1 2*2 2 -===== 1,~i ~ AE I .1 - 41*41 0 1 1 18/DROOM I ··1 - 4'x4' -- lilli e TOP Or SLAB - 1- -1 T. -F -p #73#-1.7. 1 i 82165'=100' , j Revisions: MEGH 4 -3 , 1 11 3.xy N ' , :=-9 I . . -+ --11 /1 0 \ 0 TO.S. 102'6' EAST UNIT • Se.Fr. 1 1 / 1 6.1- N U I 3.*41 5'><4' 1 I 2'*21 25<21 it.'N ,-1 "-+ .. \.1/ ' 1 1 56 \ 1 /' 1:*0 ea.Fr. 17.-O 1 ' 933'-6. ; DASHED LINE OF DECK ABOVE 1 / / 5~ ~ ' 9,4~, 56:„ UPPER LEVEL 1255 SP EAST UNIT MAIN LEVEL 1305 9. BARAE L.EVEL 15¢56 9: 12'-0' 33'-4. eROSS AREA 3424 SF GARAEE ONLY -!62 SF TOTAL EAST St[PE 3162 SF PIEST UN IT ~ UPPER LEVEL lecia 9: MAIN LEVEL 15393 SF eARAGE LEVEL- 1246 ef= GROSS AREA 564-7 92 SARA®E 04.-¥ -642 9 Date: 1/26/04 ~ TOTAL- BE5T- SIDE 30~ SP Project No: Drawn by: NORTH Checked by: GARAGE LEVEL PLAN ,~ SCALE: 1/4.= 1.-0. T A-2 4 - I.'-£-I....4111......=.-!L. -- ·· · · ' -- 3 INalIM' L >I)018 + 00 3Nll ClaHS 1 D UNOOD 319¥3 56· 56' 5' 5~" · 5 141-111. Iq'-116. 1 '-0. 12'-0' 55<4' 230' 3%<3' r-TBEDROOM-1 -1 5b<4' r - 4 py', 1 t ~ ----1 2'XS'e 2'86' PANTRY | KITCHEN ~ -----] 1 3'%3 1 ----+T-1-r T--1 F-11-71 ono 1 1 lilli . f \P LAUNDRY OUO REEF. 1lllllIl 11 UJ Ga 1 Illlll X 0 0 -.1 8'XE, . 0- -Zr,1 CLOSET r-]BEDROOM--1 Flm ID 0 0 -- r- 0 0 -RKATFiP ~orl©/SHOMER | 10 LAUNDRN I la I ./ 1- 1 REF. CLOSET 0 TOP OF f 6*68. SLIDER 0 TOP F PL™DOD=110 DECK=109'6· 1 ON -------- 1*IN LEVEL- 0 EAST UNIT 44 -4 . DN DECK KITCHEN e TOP PlnNOOD=tl2 UP 5'X4. PP 6/6'8· MAIN LEVEL 1 11 L-igiNB SLIDER T MEST UNIT IDER FP. 3'xy 1 Revisions: Dimiw--1 3'><5' E-!OVIRE-1 3'X4' 6'><5' 31%4- ~ ~P - HANG DECK 394' 6'xe' SLIDER 55(4 2 1.56 (2'-0- 56 * TOP OF ~~ ' =LIFE OVER DECK=IOGI'e' 3'-=4• EAST UNIT UPPER LEVEL- 1255 9 MAIN LEVEL- 1309 SF LIP--1 60% ABA 3q24 SF BARAeE ONLY -702 SF 1-4. TOTAL EAST SIDE 3162 SF UPPER LEVEL- to'18 SF MAIN LEVEL /~lisp GARAGE LEVEL :240'51 1 Date: 1/26/04 ~ CROSS AREA 9647 SF CARADE ONLY -642 9 1 @*iPELLS MAIN LEVEL PLAN 1£ Drawnby~~ SCALE. 1/4~- 1'-0' IEEEZZLI 1[~ij~11 3 INalIM ' L 400-19 'tz# 101 ¥210103 ' JNAO) 319¥3 T. 4 3 4'931 5'*4 3'X4' r I 1 ' 1 1 ------ 1 -1 rE-31 1 r------------_J---- 0 1- /~--_-_ PA9·ED LINE OF STAIRS BELOW 594' 1 3%01 1 12 11-zoiocz: f /46 1 1 1 F --7 1 46=w H -30 1 11 1 1 . ~ 0 9=== ~i- 14 [____ 1 X 3 0 I -71 3 - 4'+Ii 1- »T :- - 1 3 Ir\ i QEHEE2:11'F ---7 1 LU Go 26"xy 2'6'>0' 1 1 J 2% | 1 DEPROOM 1 - r 2 *0 La ---------' O lili E------1 4 17- 2'xy 1 Il | |~ ~-------- --11 CLOSET CLOSET- 1 6 1 A 0 0 L 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 h ./ 1 BEDROOM ~ 5'xe' 1 --22 11 in 1 UJ 11 l * 1 UPI'ER LEEVEL PEST UNIT UPPER LEVEL || IDN || EAST UNIT | DMI - 7 11 1 1+ 0.4. 1 1 v 1 1 1 5- .94-1-1-26 1111 - 11 \1 1 M.BEDROOM I 7 2,51 ~ 1 11 1 14 1 -r-- , -1-4-4 1 M. BA/4 Wk e TOP or 4'X4' 1 H.BEDROOM I -LI 1 PLY}NOOD=127 L 1 1 lili 1 ' 1 0---4~ 1 1 0 TOPOF PLYMDOD=I22' Revisions: STORAeE DASPED LINE OF ROOF ABOVE 1 1 3 3'X40 61)01 3'X4' \1 / 1 11 ' i 1 k------1 I - / 1 ORAB E-- -~ -----~ T 1---------1 2><4' D)(68* 2'*4' 31*41 1 1 '- . 1 - 1 41 1 1 1 DAE*ED UNEOPDECK BELOI'l L - 329' 4 1 6 '' t\ ' 35'-4. --- ..I I.ir - - i~- - --- - .1-- -PASHED LINE OF: DECK BELIDA 5~. ,~£ EAST UNIT -1/ 11'-5~• ,~ O.-8~" 5*'- PPER LEVEL 1255 SF MAIN LEVEL 1303 SP 6ARA6EE LEVEL 1386 9. GROSS AREA 9424 ST 33-4° , . BARABE O,2-7 -762 9= TOTAL EAST SIDE 5162 SF PIEST UNIT 1PPER LEVEL locle SP MA{H LeVE- eks er- NORTH Date: 1/26/04 WARASE LEVEL- 1246 SF GROSS AREA 5641 9 eARAeE ON!.·r -642 5FF TOTAL yeST SIDE 345 SF Project No: Drawn by: Checked by: UPPER LEVEL PLAN ~~ SCALE: 1/4.= 1'-0. A-4 1 - 4 i ···· ·~-._ all ' L ~iDNO~~ -~kE#1~31 1 1- - - - -31 1 r-- -4 --- -4=:===zo=l=L ----- : 1 11 11 1 r -------------==pill 11 11 11111 11 L ---------7 1 1 ~j If ' 1 14' g# 0-------=Ir----- -7 i LU 0 0 ~ 1 lili IL x Bol r--- 1 141 1 -1 1 U 82 \\ ¤====11 06 9 1 It, 1 1 it 1 Ihi 1 11% 1 11 D N 114 1) I lili 3 1 1 11 1 0T.O.R. =5251.25 61 1 11 1 I tl Z %% 1 4,12 11 l.1.1 BED 1 11 11 lili 1 11 1 -14 T.O.R. = 8253.25 | 1~ ~ ' | 11 1 Il ./.3 4 5 1 11 lili / 01 1 11 66 1 1 lilli /1 Z* 01 1 11 \ tt / 4 1 I lili. 1 0 = 8250.25 1 1 1 T.O.R. 1 |-----41 1 1 ---__-3 1 11 ~ 1 7 1 1111! i 1 0T.O.R. 1 1 1 11 1 A------4 i i iR i i 2 12 612 1 1 11 1 - 8252.25 j ~ -2 | 8,12 512 1 L-- 4 1 Revisions: - 1 1 -7-- -7 , 1 1 1--------2 -7----71-1---11--- L r. 8,12 B,12 4 C f 1---- 1 tr 42 Date: 1/26/04 Project No: Drawn by: NORTH Checked by: ROOM LEVEL PLAN 1< SCALE: 1/4'= 1·-O © COPYRIGE A-5 1 ¥30103 ' 00 319 -I-- I --Il- - - -I~i--~-u~~--Il~~il--I~~gW---~IIi-li~- -- E----------1 19<6 OVER 2X12 TOP oF= RIDE 1364' |' 1 1·/1 Atk 56,7,6 I -- Ii---- ---- ~11 -rOP OF RUD<95 04'¢f. 111 1 1 5251-25 1 1 1 lili 1 11 1 lilli I 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 1% 1 'r 11 1 1 1 111 Iii 1/41 11 0" 6, 4 11 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 H j 1 1 1 1 11£ Eli 1 4 1 1 I-1- - - 11 1 1 Li.'J 1 1 1 11 111 111 11 1 f-1 i X€ pypIR, 2XI 2 | i RS. AR , t22' UPPER 120' UPPER 2 Q OIDAR ~91 11 1111 1 8 E Q Em lit ~ ~ 41- m m -ruc<20 1 2>:£2 Ra. 0- 0 4 fi_ i ] f ~ 6-/14 1./f~A 112' MAjN 1 ~ , Rs - - L 30 1 r 110' MAIN -- 060 EXISTINe <RACE |~~| ~~~~~ ~ 1 9*8 RS ALUM. eARAUE POOR --' DOLOR= BROWN -TE Lr/~ ·- , __ 2 0 4,-Il EXISTINS SRADE 0 1022' BARA£BE - 0 0 0.-=p - , - ------I------- -- PROPOeED BRADE AEST UNIT -___6=22_2.2 L - .!22_282*R- Fol~ eR~OE - -0 11 gon.2- 11 82165 SOUTH ELEVATION 0 1 EAST UNE 1 1 -06-11- C+00<- , 212312-237--~ t~ - 4 < TOP OF ¥80(36 13440 TOP OF RIDGE 136'q• - 1 e 11 1 1 1 1 11 1 - 0,4 00« I 1 , 6 S. / A A. La & - 1 122' UPPER r2O' UPPER | 6043.OC,2.> -1-r, .1-11 ' - 1.XG~ R 5 EaL'· STUCCO 1 0. i | 112' MAIN , d--STUCCO -1 t'0' MAIN 1 1 - 8001/ U lict' _9-1 9 At_UM. GARAGE DOOR g [Date:-1/26/04~~ BLI r===f 030-3-93 v exteriNe GRADE I ---- -- 1 -, }3 1~==11.10 -~f g , 102· BARAae 1*E--1 1 f FTIOPOSED GRADEE 100' GARAGE - , 11 6205 •13***3-3 PROPOSEP eRADE I EAST UNIT EXISTINS 6RADE - ' NORTH ELEVATION VYZST UNJT - ,232---------ZE-=ZE=ZE--UZZE=ZE=ZE=ZE=IZE==ZI' 5 - ii n=u SCALE: 1/4'= 1'-O' ?LU2317#%21 TOP OF RIPSE 1949' -- 8251.25 ¢ 1 11 11 - 1 1 -- 111 - - 1 - 1' 120' IPPER 1 1 lilli- 1 1 -I--.-P-- --.i 30/rk j h>#2/1 110' MAIN - STUCC0-··~ ~ t3 o 1-- ' ~-sru P - - 17 4 4 Dll %9 _ 1 01 100' eAR,en L__1 - - - E~ 95 82165 11 I 1 -PROPOSED BRADE JD -- - - ef!?T|Ne ®RADE 11 11 - U , cttcz z z z z zz z z Z z z z Z z.zz 22- - -- -- - --- - - -- - - - Z z Zd_% RASTELEMATION~ A LU -1 BART-UNJE SCALE. IM= 1'-0' < U Oeq= rop oF RIPeE 825325 01~ 00 , Revisions: /6 1 f - 1 ! 11 4 lifl: 122' lPPER -1 1 - F---1, 1£2' MAIN ~_____~~ gregg -l.F»v-- ~ - - ~~~~ eRADE - 400 ' 0(2 - 4 4 973-, 2 f--le 8205 *223*E 1 Ii---------i----I-------- toy GARAGE *€223 11 -- -- -------mi ---------======= --2--- [Dmwn-by: 1-4--------I---fi-&~dij~Iti--------- 1- PROPOSED GRADE 0 [*eckedhT PNEST UNIT INEST ELEVATION 1 8 +Z# 101 1 1 - , 772 .chlle=t, p./. _ - DRAW'UNG ODEX eric johnson Al Site Plan Grading i Drainage 1,10" = 1 87~6 -- -- - AI2 1,and:;cape Planting Plan 1/ to„ 1 1 / Cl Site Plan Civil Engineenng t/ 10" - 1 l_Ji- _-_ _ - - --- Civil Engineenng Sections / Detalis des•gr 04- 169 Topographic Survey C 2 - - 1/20": 1 / - const~uctien - / A 2 1 Floor Plan Lower Level 1/ 4" = 1 - - --- A 2 2 Floor Plan Main Level 1/ 4" - 1 presem:ation --- ill+ - / \ - -\ 1 A 2 3 Floor Plan Roof Plan PC=I --- - , + -1 ... -- / // A 3 1 Bunding Elevations South / Wei 1/4" = 1 PO 801 2088 1/4 =1 ¥/. 06*;do 81658 - A 3 2 Building Elevations North / East 8720 - - -- -LOT-4 1 -- . - , A 3 3 Building Sections Cross 1/ 4" = 1 Tel 970 926 3292 ~ \1 e ---1 5," A 34 Building Sections 4ng / Cross 1/ 4" = 1 Fu 970 926 5293 OIl 970 390 66';8 1 j/ --%- - - =* al v t 4:14~4« A 41 Details Systems Notes 1 112" = 1 0,950 ACRES --- -- - 1 4 -5 < \ \6 0 \44 - -- - P 4-%% Foundation Plan 1/4" = 1 1 87,8- --7-- 3-~ -- // \ 4, «0110 Structural Notes / Details '16.1 S 2 Main L,vel Friming Plan 1/4"-1 S 3 Roof Framing 1/ 4 8716 -- -- u- -- 1/4'· = 1 --i ME I Mechanical / Electrical Plan Lower Level 1/4"-1 / TO.-6710 ME Z Mechanical / Electncal Plan Main level - ToW-8710 Tow·-8ZRA k ·:0~f---1 87, • -- - -·--- - 80.-8706 Lower Level 1 585 SF mech 200 SF/garage 790 SF / terracc 275 SF .ow-eno - - 6106 Main Level 1 935 SF unfin 285 SF/deck 1 165 SF ./ / Bow-8708 ;; . Total Finished 3 520 SF Total Unfinished 485 SF , 745 SF garage Total Decks / Patio 1 440 SF / TOW-8708 .703 n,* --, _. tft~<- 8712 - - - - . ti 8710- - --1-Ll---j -- i - «L- Zoning Duplex Proposed Single Family Res:dence - 9, - 9%16 ly* / -4 / 10/ Site Acreage 95 acres / 41 368 SF Site 8 40% slope 6 750 SF (1606) . Site Coverage (bldg) 3 750 FT ( 10% ) Site coverage (paving) 3 SOO SF f 10%) BOW-8706 39 .1 \ +870123 Site Coverage ( !indscapc) 10 000 FT ( 28%) Building Height 34 5 FT 35 FT allowed o 0 DTiveway 13 FT@ 10% max Parking ; covered ; 1 surface = 6 -0 Z CUMB!IJA/IN 00 i -4 --- a *€Q,-4-0- / 4,1 4 - -Ba- -93._. 4 1 " 8100 Owne. Charlie and Ariana Viola 949 5219 Contractof * 2% 4 - Ij Su-yor Gore Range Surveying # 04- 169 Sam Ecker 328 6368 1 - iff -0 - - - 8706 - - 4- T '* Soils InterMountain Engineering # 902376 949 5072 - / I.-st/l 41 9 3 1 11/ (21 2M 1 DplOGE M .0 04'2, F 4 4/11'J 8-,8-12,. - \\ 8704 - -1 - +- -- $ 4 0 " 6.12'1 . 86&15' ./.6 St?A CA U.3 1 2-71 f '0\ .... 9 ·F- WAR -- 7 1 09196£ ~ EL.87225 < 'r<9 8690 - /=-&044 4 - ---31 / ....4 # BO 8700 - " 0 1/' .\42.12 - ---' p 1/ 1 - 1 455% UnLITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT - , t LoTto I . 032 .j..---%%.I i Le•T PL Z 3 9 ---- / -1 11 b 12 92211 1,6 - .P...4 8688 869'A --I f\\1 - / 1 + /6, r -mt- 6682 / JUNE PT o , h / >=V-> ~1696 ---- --- -1 0 ' - --- - - 15|4(,1|1~ *.i ~.% k;/4 f" /1 680 A / t BULDING SETBACK UNE EL 861 5 FERRET 1- fl 44 - 4/7.07 0 / 869• --1. -- - fo.-569. - i 11 i/ 4*416 04 Ati' --- -.--- - '46% >f ~ T j ~ow-= - - 20- 2 - \\/, H / / / / 416 8692 8690 _ ___ ~2~-~-- /- - ,- p . 1 / IE - A& '0.- I -- XM- L ~ 4- TOW- <L /'' * .- / / /* 8676.5 - ~ / W / 4% 39 3 ~05 -j , ., < 86588 --- --- _1 ' 1-- -- / -- - Wildrid e , /96 8 8686 - - V i- I ....% 2004 BOW- & ---/* BU /-/ ./. ,- / 4 + Erk- Jc~-on Ar(.hltect P C. * 2 Ah rlgN® Reserved 8684 - / 4 0 10' SLCPE MAINTENANCE, DRAINACt-a - «l SION STORAGE EASEMENT - - .--_ -& i , R € ae,w,1 ~orpor,Aed - 0 TN, doct„-·t (ND kjecID Cy·d 8682 - ~ TOW-868 ' -- - ./ -/' ~ - --0-55> / 7. Mt.rvnent . prole-4,ro; 80--86821 - -- - - -- -- .- - -- - - - - *..# pr // // ./ 8680 - -- - ' r. to 01 - _ _ - -40 , Erk Jo»,or• Arch,teet, 90 --- r.hole cy •, pcy:. for or, ADOCE·,4~122 -,1--=~--«-~ ---4~* ~VI-- 1 ~% -<- -17 -- X *% Er p 06 1 '66 rliatk~ of .14 -% 8576 9 ~·vlces Is // /opertj o' *t t.:0 00 1-d. . 8676 7 other pr OJect -le*,vt -.al % TOW-8682 -% ¥<% 0 $1.- - - W.1 7 / -r-- /// £ 3 */741- - 8676 - IM~-1~ , .-- %/2 - 78 - - L O / r 56'77.0 ' 30 AFF<11 20/4 1 .Altz -I. - IT / / 1 -- 8676 6 86 + 9876.6 REVIE.196 filf-<t- i -------~----f - 22 8677 0 ~ 8675.8 8676.2 8673.7 8875.5 be676 I SE¥€R MANHOLE 1180 - \ PROPOSED Wit_BRIDGE ROAD 1 ELEV. - 8674.3- I- CIP CULVERT INIRT El EV. - 8069.0 h 86 76 7 (BASIS OF ELEVATIONS) (20' R.O.W.) RECEIVED 1 8676 4 JUN 0 9 2004 6F1 86733 8674.5 8675.6 SITE PLAN Communny Development SCALE: 1" = 10'·-0" NORTH 859[% O.0 'liVA £,94 XOR Od ViOIA SR-12!VE{21 GNV 3NVI NV aans 39(Inic'11 - < eric johnson \ DRAWING INDEX -- archlleci, p.. , All L.andscape Planting Plan h !07· =·11 F 10" = 1 Al She Plan Oradin8 / Drainage 8725 - - -- 1 i I 0' -- i Cl Site Plan Civil Engineering - - C 2 CAR Eng'neenng Sections / Details design - Construchon 04 -l 69 Topographic Survey 1/ 20'· = r 8724 - t- 1 - - - .-. --8720 1 81,8 A 2 1 Floor Plan lower Level 114"=1 A 2 2 Floor Plan Main Level 1/ 4 -- \/ presentotion -- A 2 3 Floor Plan Roof Plan 1,4.: 1 8722 - -. ~ _ _ / / \ /9 1 i 1 - -- / A 3 1 Building Elevations South /West 1/4" = 1 Po Box 2068 - A 32 Building Elevations North :East 114" =1 Vul, Cok///0 8 638 / -- -LOT- -1 1 --- - A 3 3 Building Sections CTOSS 1/ 4„ = 1 Tel. 970 926 5292 ----- / 4 81# A 3 4 Building Section5 Long/Cmu 1,4.7 = 1 Fax 970 926 3293 8720 ---- ~ Cell 970 390 6698 A 4 1 Detath Systems Notes 11/2" = i O.950 ACRES --- -6- F ___._~34 i/ \ \p.* 8111 ~/4"=1 st Foundalion Plan S 2 Main Level Framing Plan Roof Framing 1/ 4" m. 1 -- 0- 3-_If--5-m - ~ S 4 Structural Notes / Details 4 - / / t.1 - ME I Mechanical /Electrical Plan Lower Level ]'4 = 1 1 T TOW-8710 ME 2 Mechanical / Electrical Plan Main Level 1/ 4" = 1, / 1/ · / / 0\Jit- 31* - 414 4 \-- ly L.ower Level 1 585 SF mech 200 SF/garage 790 SF i terrace 275 SF 5714 -- --- --- 9 ~ GRDSS Fl·OOR AllE*5 TOW-8708 • 9 V \ - -- 3 8.0 1 J 1+ / t- I.* M:in Level 1 933 SF unfin 285 SF / deck 1 165 SE NE -p-- if - 3 520 SF Total Unfin,8hed 485 SF + 745 SF garage - - i V 19~1.slo~ , Total Decks / Patio 1 440 SF 87,2 - - -- ---- .~-CN 11+ 4, -14 . 95 acres /41 368 SF Site ~ 40% slope 6 750 SF (16%) 9 · 51~. Zoning Duplex Proposed Single Family Residence '1'4* Cri/lt 2 71 487032 - - Site Coverage (bldg) 3 750 FT ( 10%) Site coverage (paving) 3 500 SF (10%) O,76 7 /,43 -4 3, Site Coverage ( iandicape ) IO 000 FT (28%) 03.76 • . Building Height 345 FT 35 FT allowed .. - Driveway 1 3 FT @ 10% max Parking 3 covered / 3 surface = 6 auto Z 03.65 ~ - , 4 I %102 : fl-i-7~+ 41 le_j:_= I 0 . n -- '01 ...---4_ 1---1- w-_ 4 / 1 4 l, 4 , \ - CQ.viaLIANIS + v'-\\ 32- - 4 -1 \ \ 8100 Owncr Chere and Ariana Viola 949 5219 Ug# T - 1 - e,,2 4 - 42-- Ir 311 5, Contractor -- p 1 k/\ * E w 1 (1 ,1 Solls InterMountain Engineering # 90237G 949 5072 Survevor Gore Range Surveying # 04-169 Sam Ecker 328 6368 .// 3'll M .2 01,· k 4 -<<6 1 Em3= 4 14 1 e» - \ //.9. %98 r OB,29€ 6681 5 \3 , 8,04 - -1 - U - - _ - , .-1 , 24 1 1 1 \\ - - 1, ....1 / - ,-1 GEZE _92 1 EL,8121 W LANDSCAPE LEGEND ~ SETBACK | 6~ \98 -82- 1 -;a- %2880 Descrilt,on Size ousntrt' 44 *di + -- 8690 1¥ Spruce / Dougle Fir 8-14' 1, 9 . = 5 *i 5 -- I 'd / j 8700 - 1-47 1\ /= 7 - 9: T ' F _ ..2 0- t LE , , ' '~~ 5683 - € =r M 2 UnlrY a ORAINAGE EASEMENT \9 ~ 2.'' < Q A,pen / W.Popular 2"- 3" cal 29 -IME< 41 8 - 1 . - -- U- 4211' 4 .\ 4,7 - -- 2%E % Or-mcital Tree 3--4" cal J , PATIO 8642 DECK,8703.5' tib,!2 6. 1 l , ~ ~37 I> 8696 -_ # , =- 668'1 - Rocky Mtn Maple. Shubert.Chokeche,ry 0 ----,--4 - -1 {1- - 1 t f \\\\ 9 3- -- '' 03 ' 650 O =1-1,1 kb M--9:; 5 ginon 90 BUUMS .73 1 k , ,> , 0 9 Seniceberfy, S Peashrub, Cmquefoil , - e . r --/33 -5>./3*374 - ' ~~~ EL 846 Pot-114 Sard Cheery, Cotooeast=, Spirea, '(, 1 L-„*A /1 1 f - A 21 6616 AO(LJ Ametope Blush, Rabbittlush. 8694 -- - - - -L - , It 1 4 61,42.-I - m i a - -4 , % , *i A/3151*11-4**iM# 8692 - 2 i / C W. 2 1 ---- WL-L + ./ 1 -- ~ - TOW.•86 \ H / ~ **- ~616 5 Boon 30 / Pere.Iial Fliwen: 1 gale. mt. SE 8690 - 4// Bk,e Flax, Lupine. Pe-non,- 44 - - - 0- 04« I- r 1 / /9 // / 8676 5 Yarrow, Cok,mbine, Pairlbrus# Daisy, 81 / 8688 - _ - - _- ' ~ * Me•dowrue, Aster, Snow-in-Summer - - 4 / . , le / / / h lr. Grass 8686 _ 80¥- r 0 • 'opy *t 2004 f/V f,PA AE,10. mue Gnmrn d Pop,UPS,Inr»ted Ara VISao --- 0 d ... 50.-8680 // / 4+£446, Fes,= Blend 1*J,IigitcUm Er:c .~~Uon ArchIU,ct. P C 8634 - - , -1. Tollh,igatedAres --7~~ (1-%1 All rights R~,an·,04] 10' SLOPE MAINTENANCE. DRAINACt-l - - - / SNOW STORAGE EASEMENT - - - L - Thi *ant. the !<180® old - / dasig, Ircorpor=tad her.. 0 8682 - ./.-I- - ------* - I. ©n Inbtr,-t . proh,W••70% ---- -- D>-D - / / / 2876 3 bllow,og mix al a r-of 42 b per acre Suifice irrigate Aw 1 %- after initall, servlcal I the preper·4 of x - BOW-8882, f 1 - ta= // / Eric .k,hneon *rohil.evi, P. 8680 --- - / - - ..C,1. or . ecrt. For 4 15% creeping red fc,cue 5% sheep fescue c••9 ~ not to be v,ed I / 25% /izona Rescue 30% c.ned, blucgres ot~-· project ..... ./.tan / 8676 7 ADOMEae -0 - 10% idaho fkscue 1 3% dende, *11"'grls• ~*.th,!zatk,r, of Eric -krre<,L / - TOW-5682 - --* 854 -_ _ - BOW:8G7 /- Oneapplication of di-amocium phosph,te *blim, 1%64 K the r-of 8 lbs per 1 000 I- C>ATE seeded *reas with s slope of 2 1 or greater H be cootroged wth /osion control n&tinf ~ SF shall be broidcast pnof to =ding Mulch ill xed,-1 Was .kh 2-- 3- of weed # 30 'PR.4- 2/0/ 86 76 - r 8677 0 free *raw Tacify with approved org»mic tackifier d the t~iof 120 b pericre AU '674.7 E- --- - 1 '1 - - 84\~ - < 8676 6 Shrub beds and tree wells to be mutched with 3- stiedded n.11€6 Manting beds to be ~I-CE -4. wi-A &G-- - 8676 6 b-1-1 - I / iminted from sed and native grass by 1/ 8- 1 4- gahvs,ized ild edgi,0 Landscape '22. isIONS Contractor shall install an 18" , Una €™er .. 8677 0 --1 0675.8 rock with filter ~ric. I 8676 2 c 8673.7 8674.4 1 C ' WIt-DRIDGE ROAD 8676.9 8875 5 - ~' SEWER 61ANHOLE 1160 R»,I ELEV. - M 7 4.3- ~ 18' CUP CULVER T 7~ %=1=C,.4 (50' R.O.W.) 7 8675 7 8676 4 * r17' 8671~ 3 DPI 2 8674 5 8675.6 SITE PLAN 4 M SCALE: r = 10'-0 NOR TH 3· M'L'V 'IDRA<HAIE~EASE)·EN*~ 85918 00 -liVA ED'9* X06 Od V-1 312(VH V HNVIZIV 1 1 101 - -5720 ..1 -\ \ 8500 \ 3 EXISI'NG • .. ./ _ N /4 GRADE L •,r < 4 Jt~, 65 ~, 65 ,,7,1, u· , 50' RIGHT-OF-WAY 50 - 00 - C :222 \ 1 1 -- --- --- - R :=8 % 98 7 ~ i -- N O N .1 A 770 -- LOT 11 & 4 30.11 - *\ i 6+ le I , m-82 2 \ \ 20 PROPOSED 726( r -x- \ ? 8 5 3 u IZE x 6 .2 3%3 FINISHED 0-950 ACRES \\ 0 GRADE 2 1 8480 41) b UN- 1 -lot -22.- ~ ~1(20 w n•~WI- -~ ~ CA PROPOSED RY. U / 4' BOULDER 3 ) ~-1-- //42- al1O WALL DATUM KLEV 8470. DO 10W=-8710 . 0 0 - .....1,0 j --»4 7/ \ 1 2 2 Z Z Z Z ...f ' P-,0-1~~-----5«rEL \2 TOW-8710 0+50 0+00 X-SECTION A-A -<mliNOB 2- \ 1 +8703.27 ..---- 8703 65 l./« LAWN *.9 1 ---CE ---- - l/ m, 03.76 *-0-= 0' 8710- _ - -- _ SOW=8706 , 2' i r Le„ ej e' 0, . M nhy 960 4 1 ./7/3 23 17 \ ~ " ' 4¢ ¢L~ U ., 69,2.0 4..,0 50' RIQIT-OF-WAY 03.76 8500 + 8704 1 g 29 4 «C=4041.11 7.50' 4 \\ \ 6100 d b 218 b f i L.42- V, \11/ MIBE, i Gligi - N. I,8§82 k ~ +5704 - ~ Af PROPOSED Na All T.O. RIDGE \ MAIN: 8704 1 ~ EL·.8721 4' SOULDER 8480 0% 6 wALL PROPOSED b L .- VALD*IDGE FINISHED /no--- ROAD GRADE Z mo 1 ' PROPOSED 10.0~ - 4' BOULDER f- to.moGE\ '*©~-3..~ ~ a,zo. Do WALL 41.99 / DArUM ELEV EL: 8722.5' 1 k.,I i :.O-, - /4 r - \ 0 . 00 ima 8 700 --~ - 8 5 0 R 0 0 0 0 i : R I~ 3 ·· diJAWN,k,MA#Ff / UllUTY & DRAINACE EASEMENT , ~: ../ . ~.... *£:.-'--.I ni-f:V- 0+50 o+oo # #23 PATIO. 8692' 1 1- 0 46 < 04 .U ·e ·, ·: , X--SECTION B-B DECK· 8703.5' 21*// BLILDIG SE™ACK UNE ~ ~ b. 650 -m 038 E / 6 r , 6 5 .2 5 7 , 50' RIGHT-OF-WAY LAWN -129&&90 61 ' , B 80*=8667 A =. ,/ ..1 1.0 11:1. .....1, TOW=86 03 - &5 / BO =83686 - :- ::lk'.' ' '.'· i :'>·k.4-' BOW- 82 8690 ~§6@2 8684 -\ low==8685' / 8676.5 - TOW=Mnm. - -58 E 2 i - 2 TOW=8686 · 4/ / 8500 0 80W=8682 ig··P · ... *...i" ' ..4:' ,·.•,-, ; %· · 4./. I / BOW=8680 - 1. »2.- - > 0684 92 b .. 6/1.-- /0 1 H -60*25681 BOW=86 :,~... - . PROPOSED ' 5 / .'I : a€#19*737' FINISHED I 8480 GRADE - *2009 - ,- t- : ·35 ·h. :'D €·.,rt. Te=8681 . - PROPOSED - ROAD LOPE MAINTENANCE. DRAINAGE & - BOW=8680 4' BOULDER - - SNOW STORAGE EASEMENT --- TOW=·8682 EXISTING WALL eOW=8682 - GRADE 8676 9 DATUM ELEV 8680 - -- =9* . / 842'0 00 / ch e . 0 5 5 2 1 8676.7 C TOW=8682 . 0 Z 80*=8678 --*- TOW==8680 · 1 86770 8674 7 ,/.-1... I . -1.- -' 0+50 0+50 . f.69/- »17» - BOW=8678 . ...... X-SECTION C-C .1,1 +Y *94*--RVV 8676.6 ////// 9 SCALE: HORZ. 1' = 10'-0' k 8676 6 VERT. 1' = 10'-0' 8677 0 - Cytnil# 444, ~:- ti, L -/ 1 - w76 2 B ' 8675 5 8673 7 g. 8675.5 SEWER MANHOLE 1 160 PROPOSED WILDRIDGE ROAD RIM ELE V - 8674.3 lE Ov CULVENT ? INVERT ELEY - 8669.0 (BASS OF ELEVATIONS) (50' R.O.W.) 8676 7 A ///9/ 0 WV B673 3 ~~ 8674.5 C1.0 8675 6 GRAPHIC SCALE SITE PLAN SCALE, 1' = 10'-0' ( IN FEET) 1 inch = 10 1 '00 002 1N3~¥3 30¥NIVNC ¥ 11¥HdS¥ 13 30 3063 6 11¥HUS¥ X3 JO 3903 HO.LIO 3NrY,Old H01I0 3NIVAO-13 NOISIAICIE[AS 39 1 85918 00 '1]VA [P9•XOEI Od V'IOIA SaTHVHO aN¥ SINVINV CITIAA TRACT J »538,54-14-oo. , W . _1__ - 1. . U FOUND PIN AND CAP J FOUND PtN AND CAI' 8790 _- LS NO 544' L S % ·.4 4 i 21 63 --/=//*%**51,&:%=/1/':/a.. -,-~~6. ----0 0 / ---- CC 62 > 8-180 OJ to (f) - 1 .*f/- ] I 37-_~---~3- *7.50 \ 9*14 / , Utr- --1 - 1 4 -- 1 - 8760 q 26 - - NON-DEVELOPABLE AREA - - (SHADED AREA) -W ~~.,L,4, 8750 I. .....e./.. - -31/////1//// / GRAPHIC SCALE -- - //4 //./ ¥1 9,0 ( IN FEE·T ) 4 5 6 I inch = 20 n S LOT 12 0 \ N 1 1--/ rn > 8730 \ LOT 10 1 /1 /7 9 < 1 --- 0 M /1 --- - - ---4/-- k f - --14 8720 O - E- LEGEND - NOTES e CURB STOP fil] ELECTRIC METER 1) DATE OF TOPOGRAPHY 4/19/2004 [~ ELEC MEIER/INANs 19 PEDESTAL (PHONE) LOT 11 , 2) BASIS OF ELEVAT10NS. SEWER MANHOLE MH1 1.60, RIM ELEV = 8674 3'. INVER-[ ELEV = 8669 0 IC "RE HY(JRAN] M VALVE (WATER) 0 © MAN}+OLL (COM ) ~ VIEW POIN' (SEE DEFAIL9) --/ // 3) NOTICE ACCORDING 10 CO. ORADO LAW YOU MUST COMMENCE ANY LEGAL ACTION BASED UPON ANY - \ 0 950 ACR, S DEFECT EN THIS SURVEY WITHIN THREE YEARS AFTER YOU FIRST DISCOVER SUCH DEFECT N NED EVENT (5) 'AM.f ~SEWER) ,/ MAr ANY ACHON BASED UPON ANY DEFECT IN THIS SURVEY BE COMMENCED MORE IHAN TEN YEARS OF?nEWAY/EDGE OF ASP"HAL.1 1 1 .i~-- ///\1000. FROM THE DATE OF CERTIFICATION SHOWN HEREON - - - PROPE RTY Uhf (ADJD,UNG) ,-, O PROPERTY LINE ---- 4) THE BOUNDARY DIME NSTONS, EASEMENTS AND R,GHTS OF WAY SHOWN HEREON A.RE PER THE RECORD - --- - - -- FLOWLINE 01 DITCH --- / PLAT FOR FHE. SUBJE CT PROPE Ely. 7 50 5) VERIFY CURRENT BUILDING SETBACKS AND RESTRICTIONS W]TH THE PROPER GOVERNING AUTHORITY 6) AREA OF LOT (NOT INCHUDING "NON-DEVELOPABLE AREAT' SHOWN HEREON) = 30047 SO FT AREA IN EXCESS OF 40% SLOPE = 6529 SO. ET / - 10 91 j- / -///7-537«- - ' 8700 UNITY & DRAINACE EASEMENT -1 -----1:Fl-/ , - 8'JILDING SCiBAC¢< LINE n . 14 - ---vt--- - ~ ou~D il' AdjcAP:- u SURVEYORES CEROFICATE O ~ >S NE) 2% 1 1. SAMUEL H ECKER A PROFESSIONAI LAND SUR/nOR REGIVER< C INDLR I HE LAINS or ~IL STATE ,-,-1 OF COi ORADO. DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAI THIS FOPOGRAIMIC /4/ *45 Mit)E BY UF AND UNDER MY ~ TO' SLOPE ~,[.Ali INANCE. 1)RAJNACE & 5N0W STORAGE EASEVENT -/6--K - / .8676 5 SUPER'v1SlON. AND THAT THE MAP 15 40·CURATE AND CORRECT IC h 1[ Bt S K OF MY K NOWLEDGE -- A,8676 9 SAMUEL H ECKER ~OUND PIN AND CAP --~_ _ f~ -_-_- If v flffl~~ - COLDRADO PL b. No 30091 5-2 yy•qi , -1 1 S NO 5447 --1 - - / / »al I 1-OR AND ON BEHALF OF . ELLI - 86/50'-I) --~_._- GOBF RANGE SURVEYING LLC 1 , 1. ' --'-- . 0 1 *46770 ''~''·--- %r*A*€· ~8676 6 I 8675 8 I.,7 0 867,3 7~.- ~c--*4 Eli V WEI MAN'.E /% 9%- 86.4 85 65 \ ' 4 41 -- m .0 - 867•3' - ; RADIUS = 275.00' ,/6 /El i INvERT ELEV = 8669 0 - S WILDRIDGE ROAD j DELTA = 38*32'40" 1 .8676 1 6 1 (BASIS 01' EL[VAIONS) 2 ( 50' R. 0. W.) *-- - - -51 . ARC = 185.00' _1-- --- ~ 8676 4 299 3-9 1-_.. _.R~711 -_ - ----//575~~ . .3 = 3 3 & 3 -,i 15@M pe 08 0&ewoid 41 111 OS E 56 11400-6/4 (O/6) ¥ej • 0698·6£4 (026) OGYNOUOD'AINROO WIDVU 9ot allns 01.~ 8948 0) '11{!A 1~'-- dVIN DIHdVMOOd01 HOGIZIGIIAX 'f NOOTEI 7003/Z.E/4 31¥0 : do 6 91- 1,0 04, 0-v?Ki ~ \\ /722 enc johnson= - 8726 - -- - L f_ __ __ _- -- - / ~ 1-** design / - - --4r-~720 - construction --- - 4.* present/tion 8722 - -- · - -I- - - : / -- / /1,6 :== V. Colo.do $1658 8720 ---- ~ **4 Te!: 970.926 5292 LOT- -11-- 5€28 Fax: 970.926.5293 ---- ---- -- --- -Azi~~~FLF# 390 cdt. 970.390.6698 o 95~ACR~,--r- Gt ,-E~ -' \1 Tle, 8718- - - - ~ ~- - - &5 -84-1 f- - 0~---'-4-_ r *%¥4<~~z' \ 1/- >110 87!6 - - --1--41--/l . --- % SL-/-73 *~5~311- --~~~-ill-8710 - f<7-, TOW-u~ 63 10 1 ~9773¥-1 TOW=8708 8714 - - - - r r 11,%7%1=~S.Z.r~ IS f/ 9 0 /-///9 BOW-8706 % 7 -~4\ /'06 1 00. AU2T,·af /2.-./ BOW-8708 -/~ 87·I TOW-8708 , I A--,0. @«0 -d / /.9 / -6 -19-7-7-=[1EZ- 5101 I. ' --- ~ / .e - 0176 8710-----d -01--1 BOW••8706 ~ -J<4 +870123 --a/ 11 - -4 8708 -- -- -1 - r -1- 1 ---- 49 fil 11.. 021[2~M~-72 z A - ff--f-- ~-4» F - -15=-5-2- -- , /19-» -t »t / -1 -- / €100 47.- 4.-473:-- - W UD) 36 8706 - -- -~ 1- 95. ':0.*M....... KE 8 4- e.0 \ ~GLU > 8704 - ~ w AD=- I * W ..9 TOR\I>St C¥" 'I~.~80~£ £*1~11 1 Wul 881 EL:8121' n o 32 < >< al . Bee-15' _t - x \t /,/, 1, k 86* 02% d 1 0 3 94 2 4 - '4* - 33:1 - 8702 -- J ./3 4 / 069. -L i u --- DiNES 0-·0122»'E ~ep , W 6802 / -V j./ 8691 -<1 4 --41'% /k ~ 8690 f SU ~r™*~ ./ I --f. I <190 8700_ AMEQ n- - 4 UNITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT ; u __ _ -T .../ -441-1 r 8 8 &~V 4 / /. / * - 8688 . 6~ 8698 -21-- I i "leR 92\1 i =f--- 11 e- ~ ----1~T- ~ / 032 --- 32-39 rin--- M --- - 0 */ // .....lili- ./ A.-*. .. PATIO· 86<42 V / 862'4 / 1 A I-,1,4,/ SCS .....4 4 6- M DUCK:51035 / --- Ca/ . 630' ~ 27 m,E Ns'*LI 770" 1 . BUU)86~4 SE'BACK LINE 1_AP« _.--< ---6==8697 -,-- u -4 Iff . 041 - / ~ 6616 /¥0\ 11 U - A O - < TI L -1 BOW= _ - 8692-- -- r / 6,4 --- TOW= == -- _ /= 2 < H / //El /// // 2%16 / / 2 // / // /, 8676.5 el/wl -6 41---:- /6 /70/1415 8690 -- ___a TOW-8686 - RO~ /~*rb••0918.- 8688 - - 4 // /// ~~>91<.>K>O</ r DOW=8680 / I 8586 - .--- --1 ~~DVA-8684- - _~ BOW-8682 - - BOW= - -k- - 4 -3 - 9 7-3/1// / 1,0,-D,~F~®-c~ 86.- 0 0 - r/. / -r / » 12$332 // -%.1 - ~- 1,0 +I. .m .uta, rd Erk Jol·n,or, A,-ch*ect. PC • Cop,-41/ 2004 10' SLOPE MAINTENANCE. DRAINCE * -/ ,MaW. / / - I W.al# ¥1.-1,-=02€k All /%. Reserved SNOW ST0R~32-'ENT - - - _ - --f---4 f -- - *... - BOW=8682 - e. - - - - d.i- // // / ThU; doc-alt. the Ideas * / de,%0rated ~ervi. as c. o •4-Tfuc·-r / 0 -/ / p 4/tr-el o¥ pr/ess'""1 8680 - -41-N < %=Wa. ...ropertg ot -1- -- 10*-8683 // // - EOWB86 .... 1 cr.3 I not to be u~ed I Ert J:*n,on ./te« P.. A DORE~-4- ___- - -.--*- / . or ~ port, For - / - // 86767 8678 - --&Lt=17.1- other project .Ithovt ./an - TOW=8682 crlhor'Jtlon If Eric Jc*neon. 8676 --- .... -.-. - - Tr ri#% % - - U L ,-pop"'c "" fl•.7 ~_TIA 8678 f 8677.0 80 APRIL 2004 TOW=86 PAiE: 10€S 8674 L-L . ... ....-.........- --.lili- 8676.6 ., I .--, -- -el.4 - -- 10. -f=HAY-"4+4(©~ / f 0676.6 , Pr/1/IM.9 8673.7- 8...0 . ./. -- ..G. -1. - . ./*- ~l 86758 ..P-- 8676.2 . lilli-I.---,-..... 867&5 J 8676.9 SEVEN WANHOLE 1180 PROPOSED) WILDRIDGE ROAD RIW El.EV. - 8674.3~- 18- Ck.P CULVERT INVERT ELEV. = 8669.0 (BASS OF ELIVAIONS) % (50 ' R.O. W. ) ® HAY MLE 'vsrcAJ,- 1 k 8676.7 P 1 FO LL_UTI ON C ONT,2 0 1- 86733 A 1 - k .N + TR u c.-r, M NOMN'rill - 8674.5 8675.6 EFI.3 SITE PLAN 417 SCALE: 1.= 10'-0. NORTH I I 107 10 ST[HYHO GNV HNVIFY eric johnson wchilect, p.i design construction presentation P O. Box 2088 ffy Vat Col-k, 81638 -31 - Td 970 926 5292 ~202- Fax 970 926 5293 L 4 = **jg: Cdt·970.390.6698 4 . 1 ]L ./ --27(+2 1 MECH L-Al,DIrr L====n - € Rt 3711 7 9 r 1 - -1 I L founa .-1-,BM Wa l' lot t Quo + 04- L- £71-___ £67.41 7 EL= 88-0 BATH-2 <i> & bTOPPLR ru L 2-Il D¥* UP . Unt; ~-r r| CE 75 5- eARAeE 41 0 0~ ca A TO-FLONC E3EDROOM-4 P EL. 8¥. b. O ~ BEDROOM-3 cdo 00 W /1 I N E8 BEDRCOM-2 4 TOPPN REG RM 5 > 1 In i 1 0 1 a os - ETE=» - 40 <13 I f »-1 m 1 0 1 1--~ 2 .h TO,:PATO . TO.FPLR L 4 TO-FLRIVE 2%-7.6 1 i 8-4.4 * EL: 54 -O Q,> yEL: 8¥. W V 1 ' IL-1-J 9 M 7 EL• 88'-0- r PUDRM PATIO / (0 11. U W;h/. ®] EL»".O - 44%\ 3)4«7 - I ..p#*4 2004 Erk .10*n,on ,4-ch:tect. P. All r~U Resae,ed UN\ -- 1715 docl-,T-l, the Ideas d 121*25*. heri,8 Up tbt..6 2:=c·=EE *cnd b Apt to be ueed, b j. or / pol For <,9 [-7, 4.) 1 -L. olhal project .Ithovt lilian ck,Uhorlz®orn of Eric -kir///. PATE, le MARCH 2004 44' 14' 1-1 ' la-1 3 . . . . D I REVISIONS; ' %6.1 (81.-153 <0> 4,001-1 C a 6, &6.0 1 100'- 0 4 0 87 04.0 ' (Th LOMER LEVEL PLAN 41/ -. SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-0' 1666 eF / 946 UNFI U NOR™ NOISIAI 39GRIG'II# I I 107 81 14' €918 03'11YA £49* X08 Od VEIOIA SS 0 CINV HNVINY G'lim OZLS eric johnson .d,Re// p.e. design construction 34' N presentation ¥ e P.O. Box 2088 Ti29 val, C.0)0.- 8,658 - Td. 970 926.5292 .=45€ Fax· 970.926.529] 1 y· Cell: 970.390.6698 SPA % TERRAGE 1 7 1- 4, 181 FAr.1- 1 F-1 - 0- 0 - --.- -1 01, T.O.Ti*RAGE i t,Da f -4-/ 4 \ 0?ININS RM j \ K 1 -3«01 - __I U 4 -1 0 231 f (*) //---J DDFJJ KITC·HEN 1 / BATH ~ 1 4 - 1 O 4 11/-70»» +7-4 1 1* \Il - ' 17 1 DEWOFFICE E D ar'Zo,-o.\ f 4 -r.(FLR ~ 9 EL: IOOLO• < w 925 DN LI UJ LJ LI LJ 1 \1 8 2% I--4 9-9/// 01 MASTER BATH F./7 41 -411-- -11 1 -rv e,2 rk L--· -i 1- - /IN 1 f. r 0%_ I *tr- ·* 00 W 8 11-13 4 ' 0-- 3 - s F 11 1-1 11 eREAT ROOM 11 40 k -~-*--am=" 6 *r - - 1 1 - i i MASmEER BEDROOM ~ FOY-ER 23 L 1 . T.OFLR I 9 EL· 91>3:r -- % 1 \ 11 1 * 14 1 1 6 11 -9 1 0 11 I bN " DA j T---7-~ I- Fti L ¢-I- 1 -0- ®LDECK , i o 41 1 $ a. , 14·4· -/ EL: qq'-6· 4 TOAR 1 : - | 9 EL; 44'-0. . ~ MASTER DECK 1 1 DEOK ' . c-%.314* I,0,4 Eric Jr*n- A,-Ch*ect. P.O. 01 ---- igj- - 1 -~_-*3 ¤r E- -Ff}~,T--- - - - - -7 ~ AH /98 '/f'er-"d The doct•ner,t, thee kja<» c,d EGET:./.7 1 -- /2, =i Erk -threar, Afchftect, L. <rd / rk,t to be M//1 h 6/ or h pcrt. For =ny 'of ~ 1*Fie 14- 9-.lr.-- - otter project w# *Itten £~Ft}=12....cl .... .Ic*rn~, 0 14 1 4, - DAIE: 0 MARK# 2004 1.2- - REVIS,ore 1--1 1 1 t 1- 4 1% 141 8' 1.1 11.' .... 4~ D. LtewT 4.COUCE 100 L o " = 61 0 4.0 _Al A2.2 417 MAIN LEVEL PLAN SCALE: 1/4- = 1'-O- I 1 3 9 *F / i8G UNFIA|NORTH 1 1 6 9 6 F r*-r to NOISIAICIEIRS EIDGIkIa IIM 6 1 1 101 959I 8 00'1IVA Ea XOE[ Od VlOIA Sa'IHYHO aNV aTIM OZLS INT eric Jonrvi90 architect m. design ' 11' le 12 presentotion ' I . , P O Box 2088 Vml Colorado 81658 22 Tel· 970.926.5292 ~ F=: 970 926 5293 3-yaR. Cell 970 390 6698 (010+.O) f -t-EF*-Ace + too 1 -¥- -- - - -_-7 _--_L~- 22 22 23 Ir I-tr -- 23 ZE ZI 22- 72- 210 --~ 11 11 I ----- --- ..Al 6,12 11 11 1 lilli f U M T *$ TO. PLATE Z M EL=112'-0' gl (*104-) 40 /4 T.O. Rlee! 1 EL=11-7-0~ (s,%,.59 A TO. MAIN FLOOR 25 M 9 0 !2 7 EL: 100'-0. 2-- - .| ~ itos..61 11-00~ 1 tV Z~ A Ve H A-,0-T el-lihIeLE•4 (5&08) il (-r-·re· ) 1 1 $ JifiJYZrLOOR ~ < 1 4 TO. LOPER FLOOR ./ 4 T.O. RIDe[ - * TO. FLAl-E EL 115'-6' . '·F EL:95'-10. =10 < 9 El-,88'-0· ~ C 0-1 91.) <61-2.1.·S) | 1 - m r OER 4--------------h. 1 I L ------------3 -7- - -1.- 1 5 1 $ EL'I~CYE FLOOR 16 A TO. DECK / 4 10. CDGE 01, To. DECK 9 EL,qq'-e' 9 EL:'14'-6' EL,11 '4* 7/I 6103.5 • C<'.I'* 20.4 - Erk. 1#Won Architect, P.I. All rights Reservedj - -- - -47-j----- - 4-3 - -- - -70%4--- -- -_ _ _ __ __ _>] 1 122 EL..32,- r ~ ne doc,--*, the Ide<» Gnj de,0 Durporoted her* 8 £,1 De'Ii"nt of profes'lorol servkc- / /- property of ht Jo*,eon ~«Meet, P.6 42. 7 + 8+ (8961,53 whole c. I pcrt. For cD, end b ™ot to be used, . m I MOT of- C.OUBT oU- projed -*ho,A ....en I . athorization of Erk. *irr,gon m DATE, Il HAROI 20/4 21 - - --1 -n L REVISIONS· 81 29- 112./ I I I . . 100 1- O" 95 0-1 0 +.01 _Al_ ROOF PLAN + A= B SCALE: 1/4~ = 1'-0» NORTH NOISIAIDEIn 3DGIMG'lIm 1 107 85918 00'1!VA £494 X08 Od VI 0 A SE'THVHD aNy RNVINV avwoloo N EIDGING'lim eric johnson =dhiteet P.C. 1(;~~17 design 2 RIDOE - -7-Erffi/. RIDe{ A -1/ EE-TFF-or--7~ -'- --- h. (81 1.-2.,6 ) construction I ......2/ till I ...1 - 11 I lili ......... M Box 2088 - 1 *PLATE , 423% Vall Colorado 81638 00 ;59 C€11·970 390.6698 EL· 112'-0 --5 - Tel. 970.926 5292 L>fiC F.:970 926.5293 PLATE A EL, 110'-<jr- 7 i Ll_1 _~EL . 1 TO le'Fl EE - -- 9- PLATE b / EL, 104'-0' 9 - v El®miti f~ ~ -7 m - TaFF. MAIN _ \ T.OFF. MAIN EL. 100'-O' 9 ' 4 =E--_I.24:24 --- - -(8404-1 11 1 19 --\ 1\ EEd - EFE... --- El=H 0 : - Eli/T146 6/ADE EXISRNe -7 1-1- [fl _Eli -~--~-- PLI 1--0 00~ » A TOFF. FOYER L--2/11»44 4 i ; 4> 18-,44-0 e*.MJE i_t 91.1 0-]LILLLII--11-11-1 4 P-Eli--1 4- - 14 p , ..~' TD.FP. LorER 4 ~ ~2~ -ittij-t--- -~~~ ~IE -~- ®1* I #4 E m :0 EL. BS'-0' 9 - MS-1-£&2.6 04 1 ..1 11 3 TO.F.CONG. eALCAft L.-1 - - EL 58 Cr- ¤ O 1 ,--4 (86%-1.6 9 SOUTH_-ELEMATION-_ d b C/1 222-UPEJEZJ--~ ~ Rjr»E .h .9 4 EL-: 118KC*r--___~_ _ _____ --- ----- - _-_- O EXTERIOR MATERIALS ------1 Roofing Asphalt Shingle ( 30# ) Elk Prestique Barkwood / 2 :C- Ep - · 12 - ==- 7 - -. -/- -'- - -/ '6 RIDGE K 1 I > Flashing K-€oppel / Ptd gatv metal Coppe, t i•dery / \ h -<L 6-11-11Lo i \ N NU t..1 1 1 Fasc:ia 2 x 6/2 x WRS Cedar Hawthorne SW 3518 Semi-trans % Soffit 1 x 6 RS T&G Cedar Crossroads SW 3521 Semi-trans " ~ -N 11 1 - Si{ling tx 10/] x 3 RS B& B Crossroads SW 3521 Semi-trans / N Walls· Stone / Sand'Ine cap Telluride Gold / Colo Buff -/ N 1 Wa!]s- Stucco - upper I" EIFS Rocky Coin SW 2001 - , 4 - -- \L - Walls- Stucco -lower 2- EIFS Foothills SW 2033 / / A PLATE Doors / Windows Clad wood / SDL Weathersh,eld B-gundy - -Er:1167- Trim- door/ window 2 x 10/2 x #RS Cedar B Brown SW 3522 Semi-trans - ~ Te s"L Trim- stucco 2 x 4 stucco jamb / sill B Brown SW 3522 Semi-trans / \ / / Tyim- os corner 2 x 4 / 2 x 6 RS Cedar Crossroads SW 352] Semi-trans % * . toe Trim- g. door veneer 1 x 6 RS T&G Cedar Crossroads SW 3521 Semi-trans / N 1 -- Trim- g door surr 2 x 12 RS Cedar B.Brown SW 35n Semi-trans .* N /- Columns Stone or Stucco Telluride Gold / Colo Buff / Rocky Coast EXISTING -, Beams & Trusses 6 x 12 RSDF Hawthorne SW 3518 Semi-trans 6RADE ~- --- -- ._ -- __.£L-PLAIE Decks and Railings 2x6 cap /2x4 t.&b rail B.Brown SW 3522 Semi-trans -- V~ EL: 1(343-.0. 0 /<c¥/lght 2004 8 xS pei /3-baluster @7"/2=6 redwd or stone deck Erk Jo*reon *,·chltact. P. %. An /*.er-ved Chimney caps K-Copper Copper _ , . M-t. :he Ideas ./. Tenace / C.Entry Concrete / Stone Stamped & stained / Buff Sandstone · cles/11 ~orporated her/, as T.OF.F. MAIN 4 1 . . EL-• 1DU'-0 2 : 1 7 EL: 100'-00 ser"'05 h le propert, 01 0 1,~tn,-t Of professionj - · 6-1.2 J¢*neer, A,-chltact, P.6 -- 92> 810 +. o' c,d Is not to be used. I i I.- - «01»fit - *p* --- - ' <*It}Drizat.. .. .. 1*recon - 1.- 1.4 DATE. + 11 MARCH 2004 . --.. pre 4 -me¥-_14_ , -re =•L 92- REV~SIONE.: h -L.A*149 88. 2-6 It 11 . T.OPP. LOVER. '" . ELI. 2>8'-O' C lib ~~ -~~"------------- ----- --71 -- . 1 1 - 1 1 - il 11 -- AS -1 REST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/* = GO- NOISIAIG aDGINCITIM f NOOTIEI I I 107 859I8 03 TIVA [,9, XO[l Od VlOIA SE[THY}13 (INY GVHO'IOD'NOAV 11 39(rECTIIM OZLS eric johnson, RII»E EL• tia'-6 -. -. -I- - design RIPeE construction EL: Ill'-0- MLY--* -4-' ~ ~ <g711.0) presertotion 1911 - - 13*$%* P 0. BOX 2088 24& ..1, Color•do 8]658 \ 7 - - a. F.:970.926.5293 *i~ Tcl: 970.926 5292 * PLATE 38*E. ecll. 970 390.6693 ' EL: lie'-O. #=.9,0 A I.- -I 312 i )BX- --I- ' ;E» .7-- .'--- br -h-,2 --1>,--- -I. --4.-1 - 4 j- - 212 ~ --49=--9- - _ PLATE I EL, 104'-O. A- - 77 . A 4 / -- -7=--« / T P.F IN * T.OFF. MAIN EL. 100'-O• . , i GRADE EL: 100'4. ,/ _ _ * T.OFF. LOVER L j EL: Se,-0. U.1 4 1.0/LO™>. %O 6ARABE -- - NORTH ELEVATION L-] Eli[ Prestique Barkwood O. Roofing Asphak Shingle ( 30# ) El K-Copper / Ptd gatv metal Cops= / Putty SCALE: 1/4" = I'~· O Fluhing Fascia 2 x 6/ 2 x 10 RS Cedar Hawthorne SW 35]8 Semi-trans LU -1 Soffit 1 x 6 RS T&G Ced- Crossroads SW 3521 Semi-trans 0 Siding $ R)Dee 1 x10/lx3RS BaB Crossroads SW 352] Semi-trans Walls- Stone / Sandstone cap Telluride Gold / Colo Buff 4 a 0 5 Walls- Slucco -upper 1" EIFS Rocky Coast SW 2001 m Walls- Stucco - lower 2" ElFS Foothills SW 2033 Doors /Windows Clad wood / SDL Weathershield Burgundy EL: 1]0'-6- Trim- door / window 2x M/Zx4RS Cedar B.Brown SW 3522 Semi-trans 1 41 - Trim- stucco 2 x 4 xtuccojamb / sill B Brown SW 3522 Semi-trans ~~ ~ ~-- - % X r (611-1.9') 03 Trim- os corner Zx 4/2 x 6 RS Cedar Crossroads SW 3521 Semi-trans - - \ \ \ )-tm & U T:im- g door veneer 1 x 6 RS T&G Cedar Crossroads SW 3521 Semi-trans > Trim- & door surr 2 x 12 RS Cedar B Brown SW 3522 Serni-trans - --- -N- 1 Columns Stone or Stucco Telluride Gold / Colo Buff/ Rocky Coast - \ Beams & Trusses 6 x 12 RS DF Hawthorne SW 3518 Semi-trans \- 1 \ 1 Decks and Railings Zx6 cap /2x4 £&b rail B Brown SW 3522 Semi-trans 8 x 8 post/3"baluster@ 7"/2*6 rudwd or gonedeck _ * PLATE EL 112 -0~ Chimney caps K-Copper pw / 2 - -11 1 H 1 111 11 1 0 ; 1 1\ 1 4\ -re e rl 1 00 er 1 ------ - - ~h--- »- zz--2 2-7 ---- - >g ¢ 10% -- 11 / 1 - .11 . - , I C€¥...#20(04 ark Are:hltect. PL. AM 6,04, RB--ved 4 T.O.F.F. MAIN *-t. the kdeos c,Id =r=n<m== 9 EL. 100'-O' ;7---48 .0/trIFII 11 i ll i -23. 9704.0' ---p472: 1 . iMPA=Al lillilk , - ,Aole cr . Prrt. for o.g y/r. cni » rot to be u"<1 h , 14,0,~3131nl>. 0*- project .2/Xvt ..ritten =4'<riatto~ / Er/ Jd//3". 11 TOPP. PareR k, 4 TOFF. perER. DATE. .,dilll' " / A ' | la -1 L LL U.L L 1 9 EL: 44'-0' Il HARCH 2004 4,4 IT -- 1 L-71 £9011 '1 1 eRADE REVISIOE 4 ,1 1 ' 1.2 P ./ i 4 \I 'tj 1 1 ' \ 2-.73'/ . £ . 1 | | 4 +RE . ·1 1 1 i 1 42'.2 v.1 ~ 4 T.oFCONG. 6ARASE i. ._kg-Er. _lAI - 1, E 7 EL: 84'-0 38 --_-i___LI- - 1 81 , 5 5-5 7 [Ill] g /1 9 5.16 - E_ It_ 4 lk---f-- tt-~-- Ae.2 EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4' = 1'-O' NOISIAIG ELRS HOGIMCI I I 107 859 I8 00 '1[VA EV9) XOFIOd ONIE[GISERI IM OZLS ~ HEART of the VALLE~| Staff Report , 7...r> I FINAL DESIGN PLAN AVO \ COLORADO June 15, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date June 10,2004 Project type Duplex Residence Legal description Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning Duplex (2 Units) Address 2100 Long Spur & 2250 Saddle Ridge Loop Introduction Phil Matsen is proposing a duplex residence at the intersection of Long Spur and Saddle Ridge Loop roads in Wildridge. A concept for the two driveway access points was approved at the April 201 2004 Commission meeting and the sketch design was approved at your last meeting. The corner lot under review is quite flat compared to the other remaining developable lots in Wildridge. Proposed materials include stucco siding, wood trim, cultured stone, fieldstone, and asphalt shingles. Design Review Considerations According to the Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines, Section 7, the Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of this project: 1. The conformance with setbacks, massing, access, land use and other provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code. • Allowed use: A duplex home is an allowed use for this lot. • Density: The lot is zoned for 2 units. • Lot Coverage: Maximum site coverage allowed for this PUD is 50%. This project is in compliance with the Zoning Code, proposing 33% lot coverage. • Setbacks: As proposed, the design is in compliance with all setbacks. Two 25' building (front) setbacks are required for this lot. • Easements: All platted easements remain obstructed with this design. • Building Height: This design appears to be in conformance with the 35-foot maximum allowable height requirement. Two o f the roof ridgelines, one on each unit, approach 34'9" in height. An ILC at framing will be required to verify compliance with the Town' s maximum allowable height requirement. Additionally, the location o f the decks (and supports) must be confirmed with the framing ILC. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Matsen Duplex Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 0 f 6 • Grading: All proposed grading appears to comply with Town standards. Contour 8216 should extend over the southern driveway. • Parking: 6 parking spaces are required for this project. and it appears that 8 spaces (including garage spaces) are proposed. • Snow Storage: Adequate on-site snow storage is provided with 640 square feet. At least 560 square feet of snow storage is required for the size of the proposed driveways. • Landscaping: It appears that the Landscaping Plan is in conformance with the Town guidelines. The proposed plan proposes 1.406 square feet of spray irrigation and 789 square feet of drip irrigation for a total of 2,195 square feet of irrigated area. The total irrigated area proposed is in compliance and equal to the Town's 20% maximum irrigated area requirement. Additionally, temporary irrigation for all disturbed areas will be required and a note must be added to the Landscape Plan. 2. The general conformance with Goals and Policies of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, and any sub-area plan which pertains. The project generally complies with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. 3. Whether adequate development rights exist for the proposed improvements. Adequate development rights exist in the Wildridge PUD for the proposal. 4. The final design plan is in compliance with all sketch plan approval criteria and with all final design plan submittal requirements. • Site Development. o Site Design: The building appears to be compatible with the site. Two access points allow more design flexibility and help to break up the appearance of the two units. o Site Access: The driveway access width and grades are in compliance with Town standards. Both access points blend well with the natural contours of the site. Additional spot elevations must be provided on the driveways at the entrances and adjacent to garage doors to insure compliance with slope requirements. o Parking and Loading: The parking spaces provided are in compliance with Town standards. o Easements: This project is in compliance with all platted easements. o Site Grading: As mentioned, all grading appears to comply with the Town standards. A portion of contour 8216 is missing on the Site Plan and should extend over the southern driveway. o Drainage: Positive drainage must be provided away from the structure. It appears that the drainage arrows indicated on the site plan are incorrect. This must be addressed with the building permit submittal. o Snow Removal and Storage: Ample snow storage is provided on-site. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Matsen Duplex Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 0 f 6 • Building Design: o Design Character: As proposed this design conforms to setback, building area ratios, and height limitations. o Building Height: As proposed. the height of the building is in compliance with the 35-foot allowance. This must be confirmed with a framing ILC. o Building Materials and Colors: The proposed building materials (stucco siding, wood trim, cultured stone, fieldstone, and asphalt shingles) appear to comply with the guidelines. The proposed colors are earth tone and encouraged by Town guidelines. The use of high quality materials (three materials on each elevation) is encouraged by the design guidelines. o Exterior Walls, Roofs, and Architectural Interest This design proposes native stone, wood siding, and stucco. The exterior wall colors should be compatible with the site and surrounding buildings. Varied roof pitches are being proposed with 4:12 and 8:12 pitches. As proposed, snow and ice may accumulate on the north facing motor court and turnaround area. o Outdoor Lighting: The proposed light fixture is in compliance with the current Town standards. It is recommended that the bulb for the proposed lights be less than 1,000 lumen output (equivalent to a 60 watt incandescent) to comply with the Town's proposed lighting ordinance. • Landscaping: o Design Character: The landscaping proposed recognizes the drought conditions that prevail in our region. The tree species proposed are tolerant of drought episodes. The Landscape Plan proposes to irrigate approximately 20% o f the irrigated area, which is compliant with the Town' s requirement. o Erosion Controk Adequate erosion control must be installed during construction. The Site Plan indicates the location of: contractor parking, construction sign, trailer, refuse storage, material storage, hay bales and silt fencing. o Retaining Walls: One small retaining wall (2' tall) is necessary on the south elevation for garage access. 5. The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography, to minimize site disturbance, orient with slope, step building with slope, and minimize benching or other significant alteration of existing topography. The design appears to be compatible with the site. The existing topography will be only slightly modified. Unfortunately, most of the site would be disturbed as proposed. 6. The appearance of proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways, with respect to architectural style, massing, height, orientation to street, quality of materials, and colors. The project should not dominate the landscape of the property. The architectural style and scale of the proposed development appears appropriate for the neighborhood. High quality materials and earth tone colors should make this project beneficial to the neighborhood as viewed from adjacent properties. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 4 Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Matsen Duplex Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 0 f 6 7. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. This proj ect will create minimal impact to neighbors and should not create monetary or aesthetic impairment to the adjacent properties. 8. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. The project generally conforms to the adopted goals and policies of the Town. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of the final design plan for the duplex home located on Lot 24. Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision with the following conditions to be resolved prior to submittal for a building permit: 1. All drawings (including all notes on plan sheets) must be in "hard line" form. 2. Temporary irrigation is required for all disturbed/reseeded areas of the property and a note must be added to the Landscape Plan for this irrigation use. 3. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing( s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748-4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, /-----*I'l. L=EGic (416,1 Matt Pielsticker Planning Technician 4- . .....1- · 7.4--2-'ti.4.4,19·.~.·991:,.J.,k.kj .... / -Frrk·,1; 16#61'¢·39' · i I 'c...... X ~ 1- ·. -71:24,94 4-i-,t·*r -·'77,.41·. ;.74>'9'ftv,r..,Ay·,0.·.3.9 View of Lot24 from trail access point across the intersection. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting June 15th,2004 5:30 pm Meetings Held At: Avon Town Council Chambers Meetings are open to the public Avon Municipal Building / 400 Benchmark Road 12:00 pm Commission Site Tour (Meet at the Community Development Department to visit any of the application sites as requested by Commission members) 5:00 pm Commission Work Session (Discussion of Items on Agenda in Council Chambers) - REGULAR MEETING AGENDA - (Please note that all times provided are estimates only) 1. Call to Order at 5:30 pm 11. Roll Call 111. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda IV. Conflicts of Interest V. Consent Agenda: Approval of the June 1St, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes [Tab 1] VI. Final Design Plan (5:35pm - 5:45pm) Property Location: Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/5720 Wildridge Road East Applicant'. Eric Johnson Architect PC Owner: Charlie Viola [Tab 2] Description: Er\c Johnson is proposing a custom single-family residence on Wildridge Road East. The building has approximately 3,500 square feet of livable space and features a 3-car garage. The proposed design makes use of boulder retaining walls to access the site and a structured wall extending from the easterly garage door. Proposed materials include: asphalt shingles, copper flashings, stone, stucco, wood, and stamped concrete. The sketch design plan for this home was approved at the May 18, 2004 Commission meeting. VII. Final Design Plan (5:45pm - 5:55pm) Property: Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision/2100 Long Spur & 2250 Saddle Ridge Loop Applicant: Phil Matsen Owner. Phil Matsen [Tab 3] Description: Phil Matsen is proposing a duplex residence at the intersection of Long Spur and Saddle Ridge Loop roads in Wildridge. The corner lot under review is quite flat compared to the other remaining developable lots in Wildridge. Proposed materials include stucco siding, wood trim, stone, fieldstone, and asphalt shingles. A Sketch Design Plan was approved at your June 1, 2004 meeting. Vlll. Sketch Design Plan (5:55pm - 6:10pm) Property: Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision/5039 Wildridge Road East Applicant: Dantas Builders, Inc. Owner: Dantas Builders, Inc. [Tab 4] Description: Dantas Builders, Inc. is proposing a duplex residence with the two units totaling 9,012 square feet (living space and garage space). The building materials will include stucco siding, stone veneer base, decks with wood railings, and asphalt shingles. The proposed maximum height is 34'9". Posted on June 11% 2004 at the following public places within the Town of Avon: • Avon Municipal Building, main lobby • Avon Recreation Center, main lobby • Alpine Bank, main lobby • City Market, main lobby • On the Internet at http://www.avon.org / Please call (970) 748.4030 for directions IX. PUD Amendment (6:10pm - 6:30pm) Public Hearing Property Location: Lots 54,55,89 &90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane / 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East ApplicanVOwner: jay Peterson [Tab 5] Description: The applicant is proposing an amendment to the Wildridge PUD for the four residential properties listed above, all of which are located in Block 4 of the Wildridge subdivision. The subject properties are currently zoned to allow for a total of eleven (11) dwelling units of duplex and triplex zoning. The proposed amendment is to change the zoning to single family and downzone the total dwelling units of the properties to eight (8) dwelling units on eight (8) separate lots. The Commission has tabled this application at the applicant's request to this date to seek additional input from the neighborhood and the Commission before proceeding with a revised application. He would like to receive input on several different concepts as discussed with the neighbors before proceeding with this application. X. Minor Project - Duplex Design Change (6:30pm - 6:40pm) Property Location: Lot 16, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision/4040 Eaglebend Drive Applicant: Eric Johnson Architect PC Owner,' Todd Grzywinski [Tab 61 Description: The Final Design for this project was approved at your May 20th, 2003 meeting. The applicant is proposing a duplex at 4040 Eaglebend Drive. The residence is approximately 6,200 square feet in size, includes bridges and decks, and sits on the Eagle River on Eaglebend Drive. Some of the materials proposed include: lap siding, asphalt shingles, and stucco. The applicant submitted plans for Building Permit on June 2nd,2004 and there have been design and architectural changes made to the residence since the approval of Final Design. XI. Minor Project - Additional Parking Spaces & Landscaping (6:40pm - 6:50pm) Property Location: Lot 11, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision/3078 Wildridge Rd Applicant: Fred Hiller Owner: Fred Hiller [Tab 7] Description: The application under consideration requests approval of 3 additional parking spaces and landscaping modifications. XII. Comprehensive Plan Update and Public Input (6:50pm - 7:10pm) Topic: Comprehensive Plan Update Applicant: Town of Avon [Tab 8] Description: Staff will update the Commission on the progress of the Comprehensive Plan project. The public is invited to attend and submit oral and written comments on what issues they consider important to address. Mapping and information received at Steering Committee Meeting #3 and #4 will be reviewed. XIII. Other Business (Other business as may come before the Commission) A. Update on Anticipated Amendments to Design Guidelines, Zoning, and Review processes. XIV. Adjourn (7:20pm) Posted on June 11 th, 2004 at the following public places within the Town of Avon: • Avon Municipal Building, main lobby • Avon Recreation Center, main lobby • Alpine Bank, main lobby • City Market, main lobby • On the Internet at http://www.avon.orq / Please call (970) 748.4030 for directions Minutes of Planning and Zoning Commission June 1, 2004 Council Chambers Town of Avon Municipal Building 400 Benchmark Road 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:35 pm. 11. Roll Call All Commissioners were present. 111. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda There are two additions. They are listed under Other Business: Minor Project - Carport, Lot 37, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision and Minor Project - Shed, Tract N, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. IV. Conflicts of Interest Commissioner Trueblood disclosed a conflict with Minor Project - Shed, Tract N, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Commissioner Struve was asked to recuse himself from VI, PUD Amendment, Lots 54,55,89 &90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane / 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East, ApplicanVOwner: Jay Peterson. V. Consent Agenda Commissioner Karow motioned for the approval of the Meeting Minutes from the May 18, 2004, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. VI. PUD Amendment - Public Hearing Property Location: Lots 54,55,89 &90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane / 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East, ApplicanUOwner: Jay Peterson Description: Jay K. Peterson is proposing an amendment to the Wildridge PUD for the four residential properties listed above, all of which are located in Block 4 of the Wildridge subdivision. The subject properties are currently zoned to allow for a total of eleven (11) dwelling units of duplex and triplex zoning. The proposed amendment is to change the zoning to single family and downzone the total dwelling units of the properties to eight (8) dwelling units on eight (8) separate lots. The proposed PUD amendment will not only change the zoning of these four lots, it will also change the existing access conditions. Currently, lots 89 and 90 are only accessible from Wildridge Road East (and also share a reciprocal access easement along the right of way frontage of both lots). Lots 54 and 55 F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 1 of 9 are likewise only accessible for access from Longsun Lane as currently entitled. Access to the 8 lots is proposed to occur exclusively from Longsun Lane. Also, the existing open space (non-developable areas) are proposed to be reconfigured with this amendment. Tambi Katieb began by stating that the Applicant had verbally requested a tabling of this application tonight. Mr. Katieb voiced for the record that new input letters were received, copies were available in the rear of Chambers and Mr. Peterson has not had an opportunity to review them. Chairman Evans commented that if in fact the applicant has requested a tabling, it was the intention of the Planning and Zoning Commission to continue with the Public Hearing as it was publicly noticed. Letters of public comment were received from Mac McDevitt, Karen McDevitt, a resident at 5161 West Longsun Lane, Richard and Jennifer Ann Gelovic, Sam Eckert and John Salko, regarding this application. Mr. Katieb continued to present the Staff Report. The new PUD has been titled the Western Sage PUD. Jay Peterson, applicant, approached the podium. He called Tambi Katieb today and asked him to table this application for tonight. Mr. Peterson voiced that for the past six months he has been working with staff on this project. He continued that prior to meeting with staff, he sent out a letter to people, in the entire area and all the adjacent property owners, stating that he anticipated going forward with the Town, asking for a PUD Amendment going from duplex/triplex zoning to single-family consideration. He sent along a plan, which he developed and asked for input. This was done long before an application to the Town was submitted. He never received any negative comments. He stated that he was dealing in good faith. He stated that the initial application was withdrawn by suggestion of staff. It was recommended that he reduce his project to 8 units from 10 units. Mr. Peterson requested the tabling so that he could review the situation thoroughly. It is not his intention to disturb the site. He would like to come back in two weeks to present his side of the application. He wanted to return with accurate facts and plans, in order to respond in detail to the staff's memo. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED Mac McDevitt approached the podium with three procedural concerns. Mr. McDevitt began with voicing a potential conflict of interest with a Commissioner and this application. Chairman Evans responded with the definition of 'conflict of interest' and the process of leaving the room. Mr. Struve submitted comments on this issue and Larry Brooks, Town Manger, left the Chambers to contact legal counsel for input. Mr. McDevitt questioned the act of tabling an application. He queried which party, an absent adjacent property owner's request or the applicant's request, is procedural. Chairman Evans requested time to evaluate the question and respond. He continued to discuss the issues of variance and precedence, variance of building on non-buildable existing lots and setting a F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 2 of 9 precedent on approval of this item. He concluded that a new precedent should not be set by allowing this item. Lynn Young approached the podium to read a letter from her neighbor, John Salko. Mr. Salko's letter voiced opposition with the PUD Amendment. Ms. Young continued with her and her husband's concerns for the development of this area. She also voiced that she did not receive any letters from Mr. Peterson about his intentions in the area. Michael Haze, 5183 Longsun Lane resident at the end of the cul-de-sac, is concerned about the development of un-developable building area and the increase of traffic in this area. He had spoke with Mr. Peterson upon receiving his letter and felt Mr. Peterson was well intentioned. Neither the letter nor their conversation, nor conversations with neighbors revealed the non-developable land issue. He mentioned the importance of the traffic issue. He voiced disapproval. Dick Mayne approached the podium. He stated his representation of Ms. Mayne and her opposition of this application. Larry Brooks, Town Manager, approached the podium to discuss Mr. Struve and his correspondence regarding the issue of conflict of interest. Mr. Dunn, Town Attorney, advised that Mr. Struve recuse himself from this project. Mr. Struve left Chambers. Mark and Tammy Marto, 3154 A Longsun Lane, are against the amendment and he understands the developer's challenges. He remarked that tabling was the issue of the commission. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Didier began commissioner review by voicing the tabling of the application. Commissioner Karow felt approval of the Resolution for denial was appropriate and he was in favor of tabling. Commissioner Trueblood felt that the applicant should be given the additional time to review the application and his concerns on the project. Commissioner Smith and Commissioner Savage both agreed to table the application. Chairman Evans felt the resolution provided by staff was supportable and he felt that moving a cul-de-sac was not why the public bought their property, and felt the non-developable building site should not be developed. Commissioner Evans preferred more public input and was in favor of tabling. F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 3 of 9 Commissioner Didier moved to table Item VI, PUD Amendment, Lots 54,55,89 &90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane / 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East. Commissioner Karow seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. VII. Appeals Ordinance - Public Hearing Topic: Amend Avon Municipal Code to consolidate the appeals process Applicant: Town of Avon Description: The proposed ordinance would amend Titles 2, 15 and 17 of the Avon Municipal Code as it relates to appeals from decisions of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Town Council recommended adoption of this ordinance on the first reading at their May 11 th, 2004 meeting and are referring it to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review. Second Reading (and adoption) is scheduled for the June 8th, 2004 Town Council meeting. Tambi Katieb presented the Staff Report. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED There was no input from the public. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Commissioner Trueblood motioned for approval of Item VII, Appeals Ordinance, Topic: Amend Avon Municipal Code to consolidate the appeals process, Applicant. Town of Avon. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion and all Commissioners were in favor. The motion passed unanimously. VI11. Final Design Plan Property Location: Lot 58, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/ 5170 Longsun Lane Applicant Lynn Fritzlen Owner: Robert Moehring Description: Lynn Fritzlen is proposing a "mountain lodge" style duplex residence on Longsun Lane. The building is approximately 9,636 square feet in size and each unit features an attached 2-car garage. Proposed materials include wood siding, stucco, and stone. A Variance application for retaining walls in the front setback and a sketch design was approved at your April 6, 2004 Commission meeting. Ken Kovalchik presented the Staff Report. Commissioner Evans commented that a landscaping plan was not contained in the packet. Mr. Kovalchik agreed. Patrick Hamel, representing the applicant, approached the podium and began to show the Commissioners additional plans for the lot particularly regarding the landscaping issue. He addressed the culvert issue. F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 4 of 9 Commissioner Struve questioned the roof color and the response was a brown color. The applicant representative presented mock up colors at this point. Commissioner Savage asked about maximum site coverage and saw no problems with the site. Commissioner Smith agreed with Commissioner Savage's comments. Commissioner Karow asked about the guidelines and the roof pitch, and felt the landscape plan was inadequate. Commissioner Didier was concerned with the turn around area. Reduction of the parking spaces for turn around purposes was made on the site and an 8" curbside was made for driver ease. Commissioner Trueblood thought it complied. Commissioner Evans agreed with Commissioner Karow and the landscape plan as it was presented was inadequate and expressed that more trees were warranted. He felt the massing needed to be better broken up and voiced concern with the outdoor lighting as proposed. Commissioner Evans continued with the lighting for the driveway and signage, and how it would comply with the forthcoming Lighting Ordinance. Commissioner Smith motioned to approve Item Vlll, Final Design Plan, Lot 58, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/ 5170 Longsun Lane, Applicant. Lynn Fritzlen, Owner. Robert Moehring, with the 3 existing staff conditions and a fourth condition that a revised lighting plan and landscaping plan be submitted back to this Commission for review and approval prior to the issuance of the building permit. Commissioner Trueblood seconded the motion; all commissioners were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. IX. Final Design Plan Property: Lot 86, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / 5749 Wildridge Road East Applicant: Miramonti Architect PC Owner: Frank Hamel Description: The applicant is proposing this final design plan for an uphill lot on Wildridge Road East in Wildridge. The design is for a custom duplex residence. The residence is approximately 8,200 square feet featuring stucco, natural wood, and asphalt shingles. A sketch design was approved at your May 4th, 2004 meeting. A Variance was approved at your May 18th meeting for the proposed boulder walls in the front setback. Tambi Katieb presented the Staff Report. Commissioner Didier questioned the fixtures to be used. Mr. Gerald Miramonte arrived and approached the podium for questions. Commissioner Trueblood commented that it was a lot of structure for the lot but had no major concerns. Commissioner Didier agreed. Commissioner Karow and F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 5 0 f 9 Commissioner Smith felt it met Design Guidelines. Commissioners Struve and Savage both thought it was a good plan. Discussion revolved on the point that the entire lot was being maximized. Commissioner Evans remarked on the sparse landscaping and reviewed the guidelines that require all sides of the property to be equally treated. Commissioner Smith motioned to approve Item IX, Final Design Plan, Property: Lot 86, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / 5749 Wildridge Road East, Applicant: Miramonti Architect PC, Owner: Frank Hamel, with the four staff conditions as presented in the Staff Report, and the recommendation for additional trees in the landscaping plan to be approved by Staff. Commissioner Savage seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. X. Sketch Design Plan Property: Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision/2100 Long Spur & 2250 Saddle Ridge Loop Applicant: Phil Matsen Owner: Phil Matsen Description: Phil Matsen has resubmitted a duplex design for the intersection of Long Spur and Saddle Ridge Loop roads in Wildridge. The previous sketch/final design plan was denied at your May 4th, 2004 meeting. The design has been modified since the last submittal with material changes and architectural interest being added to all building elevations. Proposed materials include stucco siding, wood trim, cultured stone, fieldstone, and asphalt shingles. Ken Kovalchik presented the staff report. Phil Matsen approached the podium to discuss the revisions made to his original plan. There were no specific questions by the Commission. Commissioner Karow began the review of this project and felt his concerns about similarity with other projects in the area were dispelled. Commissioner Smith concurred. Commissioner Struve and Commissioner Savage both commented on the considerable positive difference from the last submittal. Commissioner Evans agreed. Commissioner Didier moved to approve Item X, Sketch Design Plan, Property: Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision/2100 Long Spur & 2250 Saddle Ridge Loop, Applicant: Phil Matsen, Owner: Phil Matsen, Description: Phil Matsen. Commissioner Karow seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. XI. Sketch Design Plan Propedy Location: Lot 5B, Nottingham Station PUD/ 1910 Hurd Lane Applicant: Architectural Services PC, Owner: Nancy & Mauri Nottingham Description: Architectural Services PC is proposing a single-family residence on Hurd Lane. The building is approximately 2,903 sq. ft. of finished living space, with a 574 sq. ft. garage and 1919 sq. ft. unfinished basement. The style of this house will emulate a country farmhouse with 10:12 roof pitches, horizontal siding, shingle siding at the gable ends and a stone base. F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 6 0 f 9 4/ Ken Kovalchik presented the staff report. Commissioner Didier asked staff about the additional 35 ft stream setback and was responded that it was not additional. Jennifer Buck, Architectural Services, PC, approached the podium for questions. Commissioner Evans asked about the roof expanse and although there is abundant vegetation, the roof was a concern. A new landscape plan that demonstrates the new and the existing landscaping will be submitted at Final Design. Commissioner Karow moved to approve Item XI, Sketch Design Plan, Property Location: Lot 5B, Nottingham Station PUD/ 1910 Hurd Lane, Applicant: Architectural Services PC, Owner: Nancy & Mauri Nottingham. Commissioner Didier seconded the motion for approval. All commissioners were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. XII. Minor Project - Fence Property Location: Lot 8, Block 1, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision/4720 Eaglebend Drive; ApplicanVowner: Catherine Bentley Description: The applicant is requesting the approval of a four-foot metal fence in the rear of her property. The fence is proposed at four feet tall to compliment the existing railing on the deck above the proposed "courtyard" area. Ken Kovalchik presented the Staff Report. Catherine Bentley approached the podium for commissioner questions. Commissioner Savage asked how long the fence would be and was responded with about 30 feet by the applicant. Commissioner Trueblood motioned for approval of Item XII, Minor Project - Fence, Property Location. Lot 8, Block 1, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision/4720 Eaglebend Drive; ApplicanUowner: Catherine Bentley, with the conditions as listed on the Staff Report. Commissioner Didier seconded the motion and all commissioners were in favor. The motion was unanimous. XIII. Comprehensive Plan Update and Public Input Topic: Comprehensive Plan Update Applicant: Town of Avon Description: Staff updated the Commission on the progress of the Comprehensive Plan project. Tambi Katieb responded that the meeting would be held next week, June 9th, 2004, so that it would not conflict with Planning and Zoning Commission F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 7 0 f 9 Meetings. There were no updates from Staff and no public input. There was no action taken at this time. XIV. Other Business Commissioner Trueblood voiced concern regarding the compromise Town Council had voiced regarding the Lighting Ordinance. Tambi Katieb discussed some of the comments as expressed by Council. Council was not supportive of the variance provision and would rather have an appeals provision as with all the other codes. This would allow for a noncompliant lighting to be appealed and it would not create a variance mechanism. Minor Project - Carport Property Location. Lot 37, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Applicant.- Scott Rella Description- The applicant is requesting a carport addition to the existing Parcel A garage that would feature a rusted corrugated steel roof and wood siding to match the existing structure. The project also proposes a new temporary parking area finished with gravel extending from the existing paved driveway. Ken Kovalchik presented this addition to the agenda. Michael Poukis, owner representative/architect, approached the podium and stated that the gravel parking area was temporary and the owner intended to build an open carport or garage in the future. He mentioned the driveway would be paved in one to two years. Commissioner Savage was concerned with the metal roof and that an accountable time frame was not provided for the asphalting of the driveway. Mr. Poukis mentioned that this carport was not very visible from the road. Commissioner Karow mentioned that code required an approved surface. However, currently the additional parking is in the dirt. Commissioner Evans said that the guidelines do not support gravel. Commissioner Karow motioned to approve this application with the condition that the parking space is either paved or otherwise improved within 12 months of building permit application and the roofing material be approved by both the Planning and Zoning Commission and Staff. Commissioner Savage seconded the motion. It is not implied that a second structure on this site will be approved. All commissioners were in favor and the motion passed. Minor Project - Shed Property Location: Tract N, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Applicant: T. Horn Enterprises Description: The applicant is requesting approval of an 8 foot by 8 foot shed to house the computers for the weather station building. The building for the weather station currently exists and the proposed shed appears to be compatible with the existing building. F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 8 of 9 Ken Kovalchik presented the staff memo. This shed is to house weather computers. Commissioner Karow moved to approve this Minor Project and Commissioner Smith seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner Savage questioned Jay Peterson's comment regarding the five- month timing for his application. Tambi Katieb responded with the pre- application meeting and voiced that until the application is submitted and complete, the process does not get full attention. Mr. Peterson's preliminary withdrawal was of his own volition. The Planning Department did not have the application for 5 months. Commissioner Karow questioned the non-developable land portion of lots. He asked if this is part of the plat map and Tambi Katieb responded that it was part of the original PUD. XV. Adjourn Commissioner Karow made the motion to adjourn. Commissioner Didier seconded and the motion was unanimously approved. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, Ruth Weiss Recording Secretary APPROVED: Chris Evans Chairman Terry Smith Secretary F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Minutes\2004\060104.doc Page 9 0 f 9 Staff Report FINAL DESIGN Affll COLORADO June 15, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date June 11,2004 Project type Single Family Residence Legal description Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning Duplex (2 Units) Address 5720 Wildridge Road East Introduction Eric Johnson is proposing a custom single-family residence on Wildridge Road East. The building has approximately 3,500 square feet of livable space and features a 3-car garage. The proposed design makes use of boulder retaining walls to access the site and a structured wall extending from the easterly garage door. Staff is concerned with the location of the boulder wall adjacent to the Town's Right-of-Way and would recommend that the wall in this area be repositioned in order to ensure that all improvements occur on the property. Proposed materials include: asphalt shingles, copper flashings, stone, stucco, wood, and stamped concrete. The sketch design plan for this home was approved at the May 18, 2004 Commission meeting. According to the Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines, Section 7, the Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design ofthis project: 1. The conformance with setbacks, massing, access, land use and other provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code. • Allowed use: A single-family home is an allowed use for this lot. • Density: The lot is zoned for 2 units per the Wildridge PUD. • Lot Coverage: Maximum site coverage allowed for this PUD is 50%. This design is in compliance, proposing approximately 25% lot coverage. • Setbacks: As proposed, the design incorporates boulder retaining walls within the front 25-foot setback. All proposed walls for access to the site are four feet or less in height according to the cross sections provided. The entire building envelope (including proposed deck) is located entirely within the platted setbacks. • Easements: There is a proposed four-foot boulder wall that runs the length of the 10' Slope Maintenance, Drainage, and Snow Storage Easement. The placement of walls within this easement is not recommended. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 [TiIART„ki.iiI Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Viola Single-Family Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 6 • Building Height: This design is in conformance with the 35-foot maximum height requirement with a proposed building height of 35'. An ILC will be required following the footing and framing inspections to ensure compliance with Town requirements. • Grading.The majority of the proposed grading appears to comply with the Zoning Code. Grading may be required at either end o f the culvert beneath the driveway entrance and should be indicated on the site plan. Invert elevations should be provided for the culvert. No cobblestone should be placed within the drainage ditch within the Right-of-Way. Additionally, it appears that the proposed grading on the Site Plan will bury the garage roof on the East side of the building. • Parking: 3 parking spaces are required for this project, and 6 spaces (including garage spaces) are proposed. • Snow Storage: It appears that ample on-site snow storage will be available. Areas along the downhill side of the driveway are indicated as potential snow storage areas. At least 700 square feet of storage space must be reserved for storage on this lot and the snow storage area (square footage) must be included on the Site Plan at building permit. • Landscaping: The proposed Landscape Plan (Sheet SP1.2) appears to comply with Town Guidelines. Numerous trees, shrubs, and two areas of sod are proposed. All plant and tree species indicated on the Landscape Plan are drought tolerant. The irrigation table provided appears inaccurate and must be corrected prior to building permit submittal. 2. The general conformance with Goals and Policies of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, and any sub-area plan which pertains. The project generally complies with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. 3. Whether adequate development rights exist for the proposed improvements. Adequate development rights exist in the Wildridge PUD for the proposal. A single-family or duplex may be built on the property. 4. The final design plan is in compliance with all sketch plan approval criteria and with all final design plan submittal requirements. • Site Development. o Site Design: The building appears to be compatible with the site and all technical requirements for building on a steep site have been addressed. The building is designed to step with the existing (natural) grades, which is encouraged by the Guidelines. Site Access: Access to the building is provided with a steep driveway. Proposed driveway grades are equal to 10% for the majority ofthe driveway. The access should be perpendicular to the Right-of-Way. However, this would affect the required retaining walls and grade requirements. It should be noted that all areas of the driveway are south facing and should receive generous amounts of sun. The driveway and associated boulder retaining walls (specifically near the "B" cross section provided) leaves little room for error during construction. All improvements must be located on the property. An ILC confirming that this wall does not encroach into the Right-of-Way will be required at framing ILC. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Viola Single-Family Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 6 o Parking and Loading: Parking spaces provided are in compliance with Town standards. It appears that there is adequate turnaround space for vehicles leaving the garage doors. o Easements: As mentioned, a retaining wall is proposed within the Town's 10 Slope Maintenance, Drainage, and Snow Storage Easement. This boulder wall should be moved further uphill in order keep it within the property boundaries. o Site Grading: Grading is minimized and is only done as necessary for the building and improvements. Proposed and existing grades are clearly indicated on the elevation plans and site plan. Staff is requesting clarifications to the proposed grading with respect to the East side of the building before Building Permit Submittal. o Drainage: The provided driveway cross sections indicate a pan and curb to bring water off the driveway and property. o Snow Removal and Storage: h appears that snow storage can be accommodated on-site. The numerical snow storage area must be indicated on the Site Plan. o Sidewalks: There are no established sidewalks in the neighborhood. • Building Design: o Design Character: The project design is generally compatible with the intentions of the design guidelines. o Building Height: The height of the structure conforms to the Wildridge PUD limitation of 35 feet. The structure reaches 35 feet as proposed and will require an ILC to follow the framing inspection to ensure compliance with the Wildridge PUD. o Building Materials and Colors: The proposed building materials all appear to be of high quality and compliant with the Town guidelines. Earth tone colors are proposed. Colored elevations are available for review. o Exterior Walls, Roofs, and Architectural Interest: A 6:12 roof pitch is proposed on the roof plan (sheet A2.3), which complies with the Design Guidelines. The exterior wall colors should be compatible with the site and surrounding buildings. Two-foot roof overhangs are proposed with this design. o Outdoor Lighting: The proposed light fixture complies with Town standards and should not cause any unnecessary glare. • Landscaping: o Design Character: The design character o f the proposed landscaping is appropriate for our climate. As mentioned, it appears that.the proposed irrigated areas are incorrectly indicated but should comply with the Town's 20% maximum requirement. A rain sensor must be utilized with the irrigation system and a note should be added to the Landscape Plan. These issues must be resolved at building permit submittal. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Viola Single-Family Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 6 o Erosion Control'. Hay bales are proposed for use along the ditch at the bottom of the site along Wildridge Road. Additional silt fencing will be required on the downhill side of the lot. o Retaining Walls: Boulder retaining walls (most at 4' in height) are proposed to help gain access to the site. As mentioned, the 4 wall near the "B" cross section may not encroach into the Public Right-of-Way. A structural wall that appears to approach 9' in height is proposed extending from the 3rd car garage on the east side of the project. The facing material of this wall must be clarified to the Commission. • Miscellaneous: o Accessory Structures-.No accessory structures are proposed with this site design. o Signs: An address boulder is indicated on the Site Plan for placement near the driveway entrance. The boulder should not be placed within the 10' Slope Maintenance, Drainage, and Snow Storage Easement. 5. The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography, to minimize site disturbance, orient with slope, step building with slope, and minimize benching or other significant alteration of existing topography. Retaining walls are required to access this steep lot. The proposed landscaping should help to break up the massing of the retaining walls. Site disturbance is only done as necessary for the building and improvements. The house is designed to step with the slope of the lot and is cited appropriately. 6. The appearance of proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways, with respect to architectural style, massing, height, orientation to street, quality of materials, and colors. The appearance ofthis structure from adjacent and neighboring properties should be appropriate. 7. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. This design should not be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. 8. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. The proposed design is in conformance with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending Final Design approval o f this custom single- family residence located on Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision with the following conditions to be resolved prior to submittal for a building permit: Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Viola Single-Family Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 0 f 6 1. The irrigated area on the Landscape Plan (Sheet SP1.2) appears incorrect and does not comply with Town guidelines as indicated. A rain sensor note must also be added to the Landscape Plan. 2. The facing material for the structured retaining wall must be clarified. Additionally the dimensions of this structured wall must match the Site Plan. All walls over 4' in height must be designed and stamped by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer. 3. The 4' boulder retaining wall, specifically near the "B" cross section were the wall comes within 1.2' of the front property line, cannot encroach into the Public Right-of-Way. An ILC confirming it's final location must be submitted at the foundation ILC. 4. Invert elevations should be provided for the culvert. Additionally, no cobble should be placed within the drainage ditch within the Right-of-Way. 5. The numerical snow storage area must be indicated on the Site Plan. 6. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748-4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, C----1 ? AJ Matt Pielsticker Planning Technician 4 1 I. / b' 1, m IA ' .1- I - 1 49**Epe"lijah,th*b':c:'.7~L·.-.*w. b ~ ......4-44Zi'*.'.'4~ <1*Dtl. M,1.*:#Ae.... - 2~7% 4"' .rutz)*5#9#*-46&'C'#adp~PN/Jug/6/""bbl 11Lf. - * Z.~r- . T** t, ·~ 244 i : - 1 W 1 "-I>, 1 .u!+L, f .L , Looking up at Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge from across the street. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 11, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Viola Single-Family Final Design June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 0 f 6 4 *41>Sr· I.'/5..... ·· :1,11=.54.21,33.':4 -41 ,*4{9.1 - -..'*.<&//P /4/#: I.-:.., T , . •rt- .. ..# d. . 1.11! 1. 'h r -4 -~*4:.L·~ r ... *4 "- ' I , ' 9% 1 4 4,1 .. 91'* /4.1 2..$,5 , '2- ./ . :, < 14 4 & V 4 4 1, 4,1 14, 4.b... 1 , > 4% - I p The view from proposed home site looking south. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 24, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Matsen Duplex Final Design June 15.2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 0 f 6 . 1 .316411'W/04. -69, % € . I -/ 1 -- .1-4 -1417# ¥ 1% 27* 1. 97 . I. , ' 1... f ,- · · 44. 2 .1,1 . J. 4 4/1 . : .t, t .1 24 i . .,,1£;~14/ r L.* 4-· 2 ¥ 4'4 I 'Il.& 7 . . t.- 1 t.-44421*YL<1#WrY.#le"P.Y*t~'34''tff~tf~ 60 *162,~f t«./.--- 6. 4 .. .bi 1 ' - .2 ./ I 4 / 7 - 12=1 . ~ 4.*,01*G,5.1/#441&: : i-. er. 0,1P¥*mr'",1,%3<07*K View from middle of lot looking east. : ·.U*62: . 4•44,1 .:38....r 7."b-Il, 21>. 711/irw.9,1,/-3 -r *2- . i.2 '"j ''fA~32*'f'··44*4944#¥.1,4414 .'. ,<14.,6.... -V .1 1 %. 4. - ': .1 View from middle of lot looking north. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 I. . b . 91,5 0 :. . 1.- .0 0 . D. 1. 1; . . . 0 -- 1 46·24.456 * *: L zi* .:,+0.74.*~0.1*.AL~MiVALV/*7-1-r- 5,Afw#*4: . ft:243:.0'fl:'e.:~a~,~'-9- . ....t.¥t~J •4·*.,~,(472 ,-.: 6, 1 '. 119 -*'yi'< 49---i*J.......MMA 7'.;~ RWAJ FA* . A Blk#4,EFAi~ ~, i'~41.4-4-0174404' .~9~ :,343 :' "-C u. · ·I • '.I . I .... .... .. .. '.. ..... - . 1 .: .0 0 I . Staff Report Am SKETCH DESIGN PLAN COLORADO June 15, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date June 7,2004 Project type Duplex Legal description Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning 2 Units (Duplex) Address 5039 Wildridge Road East Introduction Dantas Builders, Inc. is proposing a duplex residence with the two units totaling 9,012 square feet (living space and garage space). The building materials will include stucco siding, stone veneer base, decks with wood railings, and asphalt shingles. The proposed maximum height is 34'8" above existing grade. The topography of Lot 5 provides difficulty in developing a structure on this site. The lot is very steep and the area of the lot with less that 40% slopes and adequate building site is limited. This is a downsloping lot and the access to the lot will be very difficult, with retaining walls required on the upslope and downslope along the driveway. Design Review Considerations According to the Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines, Section 7, the Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of this project: 1. The conformance with setbacks, massing, access, land use and other provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code. • Allowed use: A duplex home is an allowed use for this lot. • Density: The lot is zoned for 2 units per the Wildridge PUD. • Lot Coverage: Maximum site coverage allowed for this PUD is 50%. This project proposes site coverage of approximately 13%. • Setbacks: As proposed, the design is in compliance with all setbacks. There is a 25 foot building setback for the front lot line and 10 foot building setback for the side lot lines. Boulders are proposed within the front 25 foot setback. • Easements: All platted easements remain unobstructed with this design. There is a front 10 foot Slope Maintenance, Drainage, and Snow Storage Easement; side lot 7.5 foot Utility and Drainage Easement; and rear lot 10 foot Utility and Drainage Easement. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Dantas Duplex Sketch Plan June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 5 • Building Height. This design appears to be in conformance with the 35-foot maximum allowable height requirement. Two o f the roo f ridgelines, one on each unit, approach 34'8" in height. An ILC at framing will be required to verify compliance with the Town' s maximum allowable height requirement. • Grading: All proposed grading appears to comply with the Zoning Code. • Parking-. 6 parking spaces are required for this project, and it appears that 10 spaces (including garage spaces) are proposed. However, maneauverability may be difficult. • Snow Storage, It appears that the required 20% ofthe total impermeable surfaced area of the site designated for snow storage may not comply. This will be reviewed at Final Design for compliance with Town standards. The proposed boulder walls on the north side and east side o f the driveway inhibit storage areas and proper drainage. • Landscaping: A landscaping plan will be reviewed at Final Design. 2. The general conformance with Goals and Policies of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, and any sub-area plan which pertains. The project appears to generally comply with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. 3. Whether adequate development rights exist for the proposed improvements. Adequate development rights exist in the Wildridge PUD for the proposal. A duplex is an appropriate density for this lot. 4. The sketch plan is in general compliance with all design requirements. • Site Development: o Site Design: The building appears to be compatible with the site. o Site Access:The driveway access width and grades appear to be in compliance with Town standards. Proposed grades for the first 20 feet are 4%. The driveway then slopes from 8% down to 4% in the turnaround area in front of the garages. o Parking and Loading: Parking spaces are provided in front o f each garage. The west unit has two additional spaces and the east unit has one additional space. However, maneauverability may be difficult. o Easements This project is in compliance with all platted easements. O Site Grading: Existing and proposed grades are indicated on the site plan and elevation plans. o Drainaget Positive drainage must be provided away from the structure. The drainage for the driveway slopes to the middle o f the driveway. The water will then drain underneath the elevated partywall for the duplexes to the south side of the lot. • Building Design: o Design Character. As proposed this design conforms to setback, building area ratios, and height limitations. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Dantas Duplex Sketch Plan June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 5 o Building Height: As proposed, the height o f the building is in compliance with the 35-foot allowance. A framing ILC would be required. o Building Materials and Colors: The proposed building materials include stucco, stone veneer base and asphalt shingles. Colors will be reviewed at Final Design. Indigenous natural or earth tones are required. o Exterior Walls, Roofs, and Architectural Interest: The use of predominantly indigenous building materials such as native stone, wood siding, and timbers is encouraged in the design guidelines. The wall planes on each elevation ofthis project appear to be broken up by the use of different materials and additional bumpouts. The windows on the south elevation plan do not appear to match the floor plans. o Outdoor Lighting: It is recommended that the bulb for the proposed lights be less than 1000 lumens (or equivalent to a 60 watt incandescent bulb) in order to comply with the Town's proposed lighting ordinance. o Duplex Developments: The Town o f Avon Guidelines state that "Duplex Developments must be designed in a manner that creates an integrated structure on the site. Two single-family residences 'bridged' by a breezeway or other non- structural and non-habitable connection does not meet the intent of a duplex design. Unified design shall include, but not be limited to, the use o f compatible building materials, architectural style, scale, massing, detail, roof forms, and landscaping. While 'mirror image' duplexes are not supported, the design intent should be one that creates a unified structure with enough variety and architectural interest to distinguish a duplex from a single family home." As can be seen on the middle and upper level floor plans the connection is via a storage area in the garage and closet area for the upper level bedroom. Staff believes the connection for the duplex could be considered structural and habitable. However, the south elevation plan (and north elevation plan to a lesser extent) gives the impression o f the duplex being bridged by a breezeway, and thus may not create an integrated structure. • Landscaping: o Design Character: The landscape plan will be reviewed at Final Design. A note referring to the use of a rain sensor must be added to the Landscape Plan with the Final Design plan submittal. o Erosion Controk Notes referring to silt fencing, project sign, limits of disturbance, and hay bales shall be included in the Final Design submittal. A separate construction staging plan is required for Final Design submittal. o Retaining Walls: The horizontal distance indicated on the typical cross section (Sheet A3.2) does not match the horizontal distance indicated on the site plan. The proposed structural boulder walls encroach into the 25 foot front setback. Therefore, the walls as proposed cannot be constructed without encroachment into the 10' Slope Maintenance, Snow Storage and Drainage Easement. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Dantas Duplex Sketch Plan June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 5 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Commission review this sketch design plan for Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision to determine i f the proposed duplex connection complies with Town o f Avon Design Review Guidelines for Duplex Developments. If the design is considered to comply with the intent o f the guidelines and be in conformance with the guidelines for the subject property, we would recommend several technical conditions be added prior to action on final design. O f those technical review items, the most important with respect to the plans that have been submitted are related to the access design. The proposed retaining walls above the driveway cannot be built as proposed. These walls are considered structural and as proposed will force either an encroachment into the 10-foot drainage easement, an enchroachment and reduction of the parking and loading area, or both. The walls proposed are structural and will need to be designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer by final design. These designs must include at least 3 cross sections at various points o f the wall above the driveway to be sure that the horizontal distance to install this improvement will work with the design proposed, or an alternate design as a result o f your review and discussion on the duplex concept. Another consideration in review o f this duplex design is the proposed drainageway separating the two units. The design would require a wall of at least 6 to 8 feet in height along each side o f the drainage to protect both vehicles and residents from grade differential between the edge of asphalt and the proposed drainage swale. Visually, this may not be an acceptable solution when viewed from Wildridge Road. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748-4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, Kenneth Kovalchik Planner I Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 t Lot 5, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Dantas Duplex Sketch Plan June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 5 ~1.924* 1%f~.~.-:44 >»4743.1.41;2f .4 $44 <*175.+ *e·5.-41 17-€19*&.:2/ /' / -/*- . 40.1 : *A. · ~:.24 1-0.1.:.tr. . 3, - . - ---- - I, I. i¥ L. M 5*%62.- ~ 'j~~~rj.;-:-:'032*23.itbuir,4 -62-~ h . 19.·-41 1.:. 5.'Or ?1 Ar; 9:. · ·ft-'Ir.· Luta'?f * · Iig.: ~' .... 4*¢44**BO#99'5*6*E.. al .; 2 '.' '· P,e'M"Fid",2,20 4-•4- + . 1~liOGh. .066 ........ 1 It ./ w.:' 21=*/fjp~ar#:1-~..:A.M.7***A •i::1.c#B, ~, 444£ :. 1: '0~1~.':7 19Z ·#*Ly- 911 . re*04-4% iblm•r.=•: - ..R .- ..Alli/,43.75<'~ *14, .J.,R- ~ Looking at the side of Lot 5 from just below Wildridge Road East. 1. .* ... NF, I- 4. 11 =-7/1.- „ ,-A- i . ': ,.. <444*'~SE #i'#"MIRk#6~ . 42 .1, 1 4.' j - 7. . 4,4 EL *4< 1:1 4.16 2.fr'--34:--. E:-7 4¥ip~:'11FAVillilll~I t. 1 1:7,4402~~cr.eli,21,5/094£14. li19031"/24,;211""qfTJF£3:.1..3/Jijficiltifri -A'Ay/LLkW31/2**.W#/ir,&81/541*Me,~5~/FO."Un".FEN, 11{43.. 9~4 ~4·'~KE.*--- Looking down Lot 5 from Wildridge Road East. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 abIPP Memo r »~ -7.9 Planning and Zoning Commission ~ From: Tambi Katieb, Community Developmeot/-7~ 67.-/ j COLORADO Date June 11,2004 Re: Proposed Tabling and hearing of"Western Sage PUD" Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge (Public Hearing) Summary: At your last meeting, the applicant (Jay K. Peterson) requested a tabling of this application to this regularly scheduled meeting. The applicant has informed staff that he is pursuing another concept for this project that appears to involve using two access points to serve the single family concept - largely in response to the input he has received from the neighborhood. In an effort to work with the applicant and allow an exchange of information on this concept between the Commission and the neighbors, we would recommend that you entertain the request to review and discuss this revised concept being mindful of the fact that neither staff nor the Commission has actually received or reviewed a revised application or plan. Recommendation: Staff recommends that you open the public hearing again on this application and allow the applicant to continue to receive input on the application as currently proposed, as well as the 'concept' he will discuss with you to revise the application. However, should the concept involve a significant change to the existing application (such as revising the proposed access or density, or revising the non-disturbed area configuration), we would recommend that the applicant withdraw this application and resubmit a new application. This action will ensure that the neighborhood will receive appropriate notice on a new application proposal as well as give staff adequate time to review without having to come back to the Commission for another tabling request, potentially confusing the public as to what is being asked for by the applicant. Requested Tabling and discussion of Western Sage PUD Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge June 15,2004 P&Z meeting HEARLdfifie-VALLEY Ob/11/ZIOI94 1921: 23 9/0-4/6-0099 JAY K PETERSON PAGE 01 BAILEY & PETERSON A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION Weustar Bank Bldg. 108 South Ftontage Road Wcst, Suite 210 Vail, Colorado 81657 Telephone (970) 476-0092 Facsimile (970) 476-0099 MEMORANDUM TO. Tambi FROM: Jay K. Peterson (Via Fax: 949-5749) DATE: June 11.2004 RE: Lots 54,55.89,90 Bl. 4 WildRidge Dear Tambj; Pursuant to our discussion of today's date, I am requesting that the June 15. 2004 P&Z meeting be treated as a work session in order that the neighbors and I can receive input on potential changes to my PUD amendment application in regard to lot location- No vote would be requested at the meeting. If you have any questions please contact me at my office. Jay Edwards O[Ike Denver Omer RO. Box 449 1660 Lincoln Street. Suite 3175 175 Main Street. Suite C104 Denver. Colorado R{)264 Edward5. Colorado 81632 Tbicphonc (303) 837·I660 Telephone (970) 926-9255 Facsimile (303) 837-0097 Facsimile (970) 926-9298 ~ HEART of the VALLEY Staff Report PUD Amendment AVON COLORADO June 1, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date May 26,2004 Project type PUD AMENDMENT to the WILDRIDGE PUD Legal description Lots 54,55,89 &90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Current zoning Lot 54: Duplex / Lot 55,89,90: Triplex Address 5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane / 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East Introduction Jay K. Peterson is proposing an amendment to the Wildridge PUD for the four residential properties listed above, all ofwhich are located in Block 4 of the Wildridge subdivision. The new PUD is being referenced as the "Western Sage PUD". The subject properties are currently zoned to allow for a total of eleven (11) dwelling units, and include the following existing and proposed zoning designations. The new lots and proposed zoning represent 8 single family units on 8 independent lots, which do not correspond to the existing lot boundaries and will require a Resubdivision o f the properties. Lot Number Existing Zoning Proposed Zoning New Lots* Lot 54 Duplex Single Family Lots 1&2 Lot 55 Triplex Single Family Lots 2,3&4 Lot 89 Triplex Single Family Lots 7&8 Lot 90 Triplex Single Family Lots 5,6 & 7 Note: There are eight proposed lots that do not correspond to the four existing lot boundaries. Portions of Lots are shared between existing subdivision boundaries, and the PUD will require a Resubdivision to establish the new lot lines proposed. The proposed PUD amendment will not only change the zoning o f these four lots, it will also change the existing access conditions. Currently, lots 89 and 90 are only accessible from Wildridge Road East (and also share a reciprocal access easement along the right o f way frontage ofboth lots). Lots 54 and 55 are likewise only accessible for access from Longsun Lane as currently entitled (Lot 55 is only accessible via a platted access easement from Lot 54). Though the application seeks amendment to the Wildridge PUD for zoning of these lots, it is important to categorize the distinct areas that are the larger focus of this application (and/or the result of final Council action on the proposal): Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90 Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2ofll • The reconfiguration of existing and platted "Non-Developable Area" with the reconfiguration of the lots and zoning entitlements. • The "down zoning" of existing duplex and triplex lots to single family dwelling units on separate lots. • The reconfiguration o f existing access to two of the four lots, causing all single-family lots to be accessed from an existing cul-de-sac (Longsun Lane) in place of Wildridge Road East and Longsun Lane in combination. With this change is an expected reconfiguration o f anticipated traffic patterns for the neighborhood that was originally conceived as a cul-de-sac. • Design and technical considerations o f the new lot configuration related to the existing Sewer Easement across Lots 54 and 55. Particular consideration should be given to the buidability o f the lots being proposed. The applicant has submitted a thorough narrative alongside the actual development plan proposal, both attached to this report that should be reviewed in concert with the application. The narrative includes an introduction and a review o f the PUD approval criteria as outlined in Section 17.20.110 (K) of the Avon Municipal Code. The accompanying reduced plans include a cover sheet, topographic survey, preliminary plat, site plan, utility plan, and open space (non- developable area) map. Background & Discussion Benchmark Properties created Wildridge Subdivision in 1979 shortly after the incorporation o f the Town of Avon on February 28, 1978. According to the Wildridge Final Plat application for Wildridge and Wildwood Subdivisions, the overall development concept was for "abundant open space recreation areas around lots" with a density of"barely one dwelling unit per acre". The land was identified with no particular hazards for development except in areas with slopes of 40%. The development plan recognized that lot sizes are a function of land slope, buildable area and road access; smaller lots are concentrated on lesser slopes with easy access and larger lots are on steeper slopes where buildable area and access are more restricted. In 1981, the Wildridge Subdivision was completely replatted with a total of 849 planned development units and is the foundation o f the current zoning in Wildridge. Over the years, there have been several PUD Amendments and trans ferring o f development rights. To assist in organizing the application review discussion, this report is being 'categorized' into the four major issues associated with this PUD amendment. 1. Non-Developable Areas and the Wildridge PUD Staff have recently reviewed the Wildridge PUD plat and found a total of 33 lots (out of the entire subdivision) that contain a "non-developable area" within existing lot boundaries. According to the plat note: "No development shall occur on the non-developable area without written specific approval o f the covenants committee and the Town o f Avon. Development shall include buildings, fences, signs, roads, and grading. Non-developable areas shall be physically undisturbed and left in their present natural state except for approved access and utility easements". Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 11 Of the 33 lots that include a non-developable area designation, approximately 22 have been constructed and 11 remain vacant (including the 4 that are the subject ofthis application). Of the 22 lots constructed, fifty percent appear to have been constructed below the 'allowable zoning' (i.e. single family built on duplex zoned lots). This application proposes no 'net loss' of non-developable area, however, it does propose a reconfiguration o f the areas to permit the proposal as laid out. Important to also note is that the application proposes to include the entire utility easement into the calculation o f proposed non- developable area. In evaluating the merits of this application, it is important to recognize the potential change that may occur to all existing non-developable areas currently platted as a result of action on this application. Though there is limited documentation in the original Wildridge PUD application as to the premise of these areas, the existing plat note language and the actual location o f the areas as they exist today appear to have resulted as a consideration of steep slopes, locations of utility easements (sewer, water, and electric), and the creation of open space buffers between private properties and between Wildridge and public lands o f the White River National Forest. This application appears to break the continuity o f non-developable area buffers in order to accommodate site design. 2. "Down-Zoning" of the existing Wildridge PUD & Character of adjacent neighborhood zoning Recently, there have been several PUD Amendments in Wildridge wherein development rights have been legally terminated and the configuration of these lots altered and replatted - the most recent of those include Lot 47/48, Block 1, (Ordinance 02-13); Lot 10/11, Block 2, WR (Ordinance 02-12); and Lot 42/43, Block 4, WR (Ordinance 02-11). None of these proposals included significant alterations to traffic patterns or to existing platted "non-developable areas". In comparison, this application proposes to separate duplex and multifamily dwelling units zoned for eleven dwelling units in total. The new configuration will also reduce density by three dwelling units in total, however, create a visual massing of eight separate structures instead of the four contemplated and approved by the existing PUD. Though it could be argued that the duplex and multifamily structures would be of a size and mass much larger than the proposed single-family homes, the increased disturbances required for each lot and the doubling ofbuildable 'structures' should be a significant consideration in review of this application. The application contends that there are a significant number of single-family residences constructed in Block 4, and therefore, the 'character' ofthe existing zoning of these lots (collectively) is not in keeping with the existing zoning o f the neighborhood and the constructed residences. The application states that one of the positive impacts of approval will include ". .. maintaining and enhancing the existing residential quality, character, design, and scale o f the neighborhood". Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4ofll To clarify this point, please review the following zoning summary for Wildridge Block 4: Current Zoning: Single-Family Duplex Triplex Fourplex Total Lots 2 77 3 1* Constructed+ 1 53 0 0** Notes: *Lots 42 and 43 rezoned from 2 fourplex lots to 3 duplex lots in 2002. *Lot 64 rezoned from fourplex to duplex in 1988/ Lot 39 zoned fourplex or 2 duplexes per the Wildridge PUD (currently vacant). ** Lot 39 is currently vacant and zoned fourplex. ' Constructed does not reflect zoning (i.e. duplex lots constructed with single-family homes) Though the table is not a zoning certification, for purposes o f this report it does demonstrate that that the 'character' of the neighborhood (which staff considers to be Block 4) consists largely of duplex zoning, with a slight variation towards multifamily rather than single-family zoning. This basic application premise may be overstated in this regard, since there is nothing to preclude any of the existing single-family residences (or those currently featuring a lock-off unit to count as a second dwelling unit) from redeveloping the properties to avail themselves to the current zoning and development o f the additional dwelling unit. 3. Reconfiguration ofaccess to subject properties, adding of potential additional traffic to Longsun Lane. The application proposes to create an engineering solution to the proposed lot reconfiguration by accessing alllots from Longsun Lane. Longsun Lane currently provides access to Lots 54 and 55 only. Lot 54 is zoned duplex and Lot 55 is zoned triplex for a total of five dwelling units. The application, as proposed with a total of eight single- family lots, would increase traffic by a total o f three dwelling units. The Town Engineer has studied the potential increase in Average Daily Traffic to Longsun Lane as a result of this proposal, and by standard estimates, each additional dwelling unit will add an average of 6 trips per day on Longsun Lane. This would result in an increase of approximately 18 trips per day according to this estimate, however the Town Engineer estimates the impacts of the change to be minimal due to several down-zonings along Longsun Lane over the years. As currently platted, a shared access easement to Lots 89 and 90 is in place for the use of both lots in establishing access to the 2 triplex buildings. This proposal will clearly remove traffic from Wildridge Road East where the access is currently platted and increase traffic on Longsun Lane. Though the net effect may be negligible, the proposed access configuration was not approved in the original plat of Wildridge. Clearly, the extension of Longsun Lane (or any cul-de-sac within Town) is not without some impacts to those residents that purchased properties under the impression that a limited amount of development and traffic could be expected by build-out of their respective neighborhood. As submitted, the extension of Longsun Lane will increase the non-conformity o f the current road and require approval of a variance from subdivision standards because of the increase length and Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 11 total number of dwelling units served. That application has been filed for review with Town Council. 4. Design of new PUD and technical considerations Although the application appears functional and addresses the PUD Criteria, the most overriding o f issues with the application as proposed is the precedent it may set in Wildridge to 'move' not only density, but more importantly, the platted "Non-Developable areas". There is nothing to preclude more developers from requesting the same privilege being sought with this application. The movement of platted and existing lot restrictions that are relied upon by residents and considered to "add value" to their decision in purchasing residential property and live within the Town is a serious undertaking. It is far more than an exercise in engineering and trading of"like for like". In this case, the trade includes an already platted utility easement to make up the difference. Consequently, the owners of alllots in Wildridge that feature a "non-developable area" (as outlined herein) may elect to move these boundaries to more effectively construct a new home, a remodel of an existing home, or the addition o f un-built density. Though the number o f lots purchased with this restriction does not represent a large majority, it would appear that moving those areas without specific rationale and tangible community benefit may open a "Pandora's Box" ofPUD amendment applications. Additionally, though some may find the triplex zoning out o f character with this area of Wildridge, these lots have been zoned and o f public record since the final subdivision plat of Wildridge was approved in 1981. The fact that some owners have intentionally built less than allowed by zoning (primarily on duplex lots) is a matter o f personal choice and site consideration, and has little to do with the original approval or expressed design for this block of the subdivision. As previously mentioned, while the existing zoning for triplex and duplex units may be considered out of character, this should be reconciled with the effective reduction ofmassing that 4 total buildings would have versus 8 total buildings on 8 total lots. Since triplex units are typically built smaller (as the market dictates), it is estimated by staff that the effective 'bulk' o f the existing zoning would be less than the proposed single family residences (proposed as 4,000 square feet of'building area'). The text of application proposes that the actual size ofhomes shall not exceed 4,000 square feet, and that the 'approximate' home size could range from 2,800 to 3,200 square feet in size. The proposed Longsun Lane extension appears to double the area on the site with slopes o f 40% or steeper. Only two o f the proposed lots appear to have access commensurate with the existing access to Lots 54 and 55. As a result o f the proposal to extend Longsun Lane, it appears to staff that at least 3 0 f the lots will be difficult to construct, with access equal to or possibly worse than existing access to Lots 89 and 90. Because there is little room for error on these lots (average effective depth of 80 feet and width of 115 feet), the future homeowners may deal with less than desirable parking and loading circumstances. As already cited, the increased length and dwelling units served by the revised cul-de-sac will further exacerbate the non-conformity of Longsun Lane. Separate applications for Preliminary Subdivision and Variance from the Subdivision Codes is being reviewed by the Town Engineer, Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 of 11 and should the PUD Amendment be approved, a final plat reconfiguring the new lot layout and private access drive would require approval by the Town Council. PUD Design Criteria According to the Town of Avon Zoning Code, Section 17.20.110, the following shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating a PUD. It shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following design criteria, or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a particular development solution is consistent with the public interest. 1. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Objectives. The fundamental reason for having a Comprehensive Plan is to generally communicate where and how land uses may and will occur in the Town. The land use plan is based upon these goals and polices. Implementation is through annexation, subdivision and zoning regulations. This proposed PUD Amendment produces a "mixed bag" of compliance with the following goals and polices o f the Town Comprehensive Plan based upon the following: Policy Al.1 Development and redevelopment will be of a scale and intensity appropriate for the neighborhood in which it is located. The current Wildridge subdivision did not contemplate development of additional single-family dwelling units on any of the lots in this proposal. In fact, the original Wildridge subdivision appears to have specifically created larger lots on steeper slopes, because the buildable area and access was identified as being more restrictive. This also included the placement of 'non-developable area' restrictions in Blocks 3 and 4. While the downzoning appears supportable in concept, the revised configuration of the lots and the requisite loading of trajfic onto an existing cul-de-sac is not appropriate for those in the neighborhood that did not anticipate this additional tra®c. Like-wise, those neighbors that purchased homes in proximity to these lots (particularly Lots 89 and 90) did not expect the non-developable areas to be changed and may have relied on these areas as 'view' corridors or development buffers established by way of these platted areas. Policy Al.3 Flexible zoning such as PUD should be encouraged where it results in more effective use of land. However, such flexible zoning will only be allowed where it provides a benefit to the community and is compatible with surrounding development. Variations from standard zoning must be clearly demonstrated, and will be permitted only as needed to achieve effective development. The applicant is proposing to improve the character of the neighborhood in this application. In addition, they are proposing to a uniform treatment Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 7 of 11 of the homes architecturally (though not adopting specific design guidelines). Additionally, the proposal calls for limited building areas with a 4,000 square foot maximum building area and a 40% maximum site coverage. The development standards being proposed are more flexible on Lots 1-4 to accommodate the single-family residences on the new lot configuration, whichincludes a 10'0"front-yard setbackrather than the standard 25'0" front-yard setback. The purpose of this front setback is to accommodate drainage, snow removal, adequate maneuvering and site distance for vehicles and maintenance. To vary from the existing development and subdivision standards (by a private road) to create ne-w single-family properties has not been adequately demonstrated in the application, and only appears to be a by- product of the engineering plans and the existing physical constraints. Policy Al.6 Land for open space should be preserved throughout the community, particularly on steep slopes and other environmentally sensitive areas. As aforementioned, the purpose of creating the Wildridge PUD was to create a residential subdivision that focused on the preservation of open space, limited density and avoidance of development on steep slopes and in respect to natural drainage patterns. As evidenced by the survey, a large portion of the collective property under review exceeds 30% slope. The most significant issue is the 'swapping' of platted non-developable area for a like amount of non- developable area with no rationale behind doing so. Open space areas in Wildridge should be reasonably relied upon by existing areas as remaining intact and as originally platted. Policy A3.7 Steep slopes in and around the community should be designated and preserved as open space wherever possible. Again, a good portion of this project is proposed on 30% slopes and demonstrates that in order to improve the access and create the new lots development and subdivision standards must be modified to accomplish. Goal Cl Provide for diverse, quality housing to serve all economic segments and age groups of the population. The application contends that it will provide for a single-family residential development that will maintain and enhance the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Also, it notes that the present and project supply of multiplefamily structures... has been satisfied". The Town of Avon affordable housing program utilizes the median family income limit for a four-person household in determining eligibility for deed restricted rental or sale housing. In 2004, HUD adjusted this number to $76,700 per year. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 8 of 11 The average home size in the application is anticipated between 2,800 and 3,200 square feet. Though the application correctly notes that needs for lower-income and seasonal workers may currently be satisfied, it does not guarantee the nature of the single-family housing proposed and more specifically in the Wildridge subdivision. It fails to offer or provide any assurances or guarantee that the single family homes provided will meet the stated goal of providing .. for middle income and year-round residents". Without any assurances or price guarantees, staffwould consider the construction of multifamily and duplex dwellings to more adequately meet these needs in Wildridge. Goal Fl Make Avon's unique natural setting and its open space central elements to its identity and structure. Open space areas in Wildridge should be reasonably relied upon by existing areas as remaining intact and as originally platted. The proposal appears to assign a value judgment to the platted non-developable areas by way Of reallocating the same amount in a different configuration on the lot. Staff does not support the movement of such areas, regardless ofthe ability to compensate a similar area on the same property. Policy Fl.2 Development shall not be allowed on steep billside areas vulnerable to environmental and visual degradation. The non-developable areas in Wildridge provide platted 'breaks' in development for visual relief and steep slope protection. In Blocks 3 and 4, it is apparent that they also serve as a development buffer to Tract H, which is designated as "Open Space, Drainage, and Access . To remove or otherwise alter the existing open space does not appear to meet the original intent of environmental and visual buffers. 2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, the sub-area design recommendations and design guidelines of the Town. The application may meet the design guidelines of the Town, however, the suggested treatment of the single-family units is not proposed as a 'design guideline' specific to the project. 3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation. Though there may be merit in the application o f single- family homes in this block o f Wildridge in place o f multifamily dwellings, the requisite changes to traffic patterns, bulk and massing, existing buffer zones, and character o f the area are not positively affected. 4. Uses, activity, and density provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. The proposed uses do not appear to provide a compatible and efficient relationship with the surrounding uses and existing residences, particularly on Longsun Lane. Several of the Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 9 of 11 lots proposed are highly constrained and may create access and loading problems for future residents o f these properties i f approved as submitted. 5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed. The application does not appear to negatively affect a known geologic hazard (no documentation has been provided) 6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. The site plan and location of buildings and open space do not appear to be responsive to natural features or the existing PUD. This may include an impact to the overall aesthetic quality of the community, since the number o f structures will double i f the rezoning is approved. 7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town Transportation Plan. Please refer to the attached memo from the Town Engineer. 8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. The landscaping will be reviewed through the design process should the PUD be approved, but it appears as though it can be designed to preserve the views and function of the Western Sage subdivision as proposed. 9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of future project phases. The phasing plan submitted appears to be a logical approach to the PUD goals; however, the build out of each lot is not specified to occur in any particular order. A preliminary subdivision has been submitted in conjunction with the application for review by Town Council. 10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection. Adequate facilities are available to service the proposal, and the new 'extension' of Longsun Lane is being applied for as a private road. No extension to municipal services is being requested by the applicant. Please refer to the attached memo from the Town Engineer for specific comments on the proposed utility and drainage improvements required. 11. That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD. The proposal appears to comply with capacities originally contemplated in the first Wildridge PUD approval. 12. Development Standards Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 10 0 f 11 Development standards have been submitted for the PUD amendment as proposed. A few technical issues, such as the clarification of buildable area and/or maximum buildable square footage and a clarification of building setbacks by lot (in the standards, not referencing the development plan) are required. Should the PUD amendment be approved, staff would request additional notes be brought into these standards from the existing Wildridge PUD Development Plan (Final Subdivision Plat). Staff Recommendation Staff commends the applicant for making his own efforts to inform and invite public comment on the proposal outside of the requisite public notice process. Though the correspondence sent (Section VI of the application) to interested parties does not fully describe the extent and significant amendments proposed (such as the revised access from Longsun Lane and the reconfiguration o f existing non-developable areas), it does make an effort to begin a dialogue with those most affected in the immediate neighborhood. This PUD Amendment application presents significant stumbling blocks for the staff to recommend approval, which have been outlined in this report. The issue of utmost importance is the precedent being established by this proposal without any guidelines or policies for doing so. This precedent is most clearly related to revising access and increasing traffic on a pre-existing cul-de-sac, and the moving ofplatted non-developable areas in Wildridge. While the application makes a reasonable case for 'character' issues, it fails to provide evidence that the single-family proposal can be constructed without substantial changes to the existing access and open space configuration (which includes the counting of an existing utility easement as 'open space') as proposed. That the proposal can be engineered to 'fit' as submitted does not compel staff to support the amendment itself. Along these lines, the technical issues outlined herein associated with steep slopes, buildability, housing goals, subdivision variance, development standards, etc. are secondary to the overriding issues of approving this type of amendment to an existing PUD in the Town. When contemplating the implications o f changed policy direction and revised zoning entitlements in a rapidly growing community such as Avon, staff considers the dependability of public development documents that the community relies upon in investing in our municipality. Be it in Wildridge, Benchmark or the Village (at Avon), to dramatically change or deviate from the approved zoning and development plan of a project (particularly in a residential neighborhood as mature as Wildridge) requires that the decision be made carefully, transparently, and in full consideration of those most affected. For these reasons, staff cannot recommend approval of this PUD amendment as proposed. We would recommend that the Planning & Zoning Commission hear the application and public comment, and forward this recommendation to Town Council. The Town Council should consider the applicant' s testimony and application, the public comment and neighborhood input, and at the same time be mindful o f the implications o f a decision such as this on future policy makers and future residents of the Town. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, PUD Amendment June 1,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 11 of 11 Recommended Motion " I move to approve Resolution 04-17, recommending to the Town Council to deny the "Western Sage PUD" for Lots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, as more specifically described in the application dated May 4,2004." If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748- 4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. RespectfullY_submitted, --*. Tambi Katieb, AICP Report Attachments: A. PUD Application dated May 4,2004 (Revised) PUD Development Plans for "Western Sage PUD" dated May 6,2004 Memo from Town Engineer to Planning & Zoning Commission dated May 26,2004 Compilation o f Public Comments Received (to date) Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 COP TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-17 SERIES OF 2004 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF A PUD AMENDMENT TO THE WILDRIDGE PUD FOR LOTS 54,55,89 AND 90, BLOCK 4, WILDRIDGE, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO HEREAS, Jay K. Peterson has applied for an amendment to the Wildridge PUD to create eight (8) single-family lots on Lots 54,55,89 and 90, Block 4 known as the "Western Sage PUD", as more specifically described in the application dated May 4,2004; and HEREAS, after notices required by law, a public hearing on said application was held by the Planning & Zoning Commission o f the Town o f Avon; and HEREAS, said application fails to comply with the PUD criteria set forth in Section 17.20.110, which include the following: a. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Objectives has not been met as required by 17.20.110H(1). b. The overall design concept of this PUD Amendment fails to conform to the existing non-developable areas with the proposed building locations. The movement of these areas will alter the character and be detrimental to the neighborhood. 17.20.110H(2) c. The existing development rights on Lots 54,55,89 and 90 are compatible with the immediate scale and character of existing properties, and the existing access conditions, and platted non-developable areas, while the proposed decrease o f density to 8 single-family residences are not compatible as applied for. 17.20.110H(3) d. This PUD Amendment application is not responsive to the existing topography and natural features of Wildridge. 17.20.110H(4) e. This PUD Amendment application does not create functional or optimized open space that is responsive to existing views and buffers to open space. 17.20.110H(8) f. This PUD will further increase the non-conformity o f Longsurl Lane, and the traffic and number of dwelling units projected onto the existing cul-de-sac. 17.20.110H(11) . ~~OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends denial of the application for an amendment to the Wildridge PUD to rezone Lots 54,55,89 and 90, Block 4 from duplex and triplex zoning for an existing total of eleven (11) dwelling units to eight (8) dwelling units on eight (8) single-family lots (Lots 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 & 8), reducing three (3) development rights, as more specifically described in the application dated May 4,2004. ADOPTED THIS 1 st DAY- OF June, 2004 Signed: Date: Chris Evans, Chairman Attest: Date: Terry Smith, Secretary F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Resolutions\2004\Res 04-17 L54,55,89,90 B4 WR PUD Amendment denial.doc . Memo TO: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Norman Wood, Town Eng]neer I /77 0 Date: May 26,2004 Re: Western Sage P.U.D. - Preliminary Subdivision Plan A Resubdivision ofLots 54,55,89 & 90, Block 4, Wiklridge 5190 & 5196 Ijongsun Lane and 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East Summary: Jay k. Peterson has submitted application for Subdivision Preliminary Plan approval in conjunction with a PUD Amendment Application for Lots 54,55, 89 and 90, Block 4, Wildridge. The proposed PUD Amendment would convert a duplex lot and three tri-plex lots to eight single-family lots. The Subdivision Preliminary Plan Application shows the proposed layout ofthe lots, street extension to provide access, and water and sewer service extensions to service the new lots. The purpose ofthis review is to determine whether the proposed subdivision conforms to these and other applicable regulations, policies and guidelines and whether it represents good planning practice. The issues identified with respect to the proposed Preliminary Plan for the resubdivision of existing lots include: 1. Non-Developable Area - A note on the Wildridge Plat states, 'No development shall occur on the Non-Developable Area without written specific approval ofthe Covenants Committee and the Town of Avon. Development shall include buildings, fences, signs, roads and grading. Non-Developable Areas shall be physically undisturbed and left in their present natural state except for approved access and utility easements." The existing Wildridge Plat shows a significant Non- Developable Area on the Lots proposed for resubdivision and the proposed resubdivision includes building areas, roads, grading and utilities within those existing Non-Developable Areas. The Preliminary Plan proposes to replace the existing Non-Developable Areas with a relocated Non- Developable Area ofequivalent size. However, the redefined Non-Developable area does not appear match the apparent intent ofthe originally defined area. The original Non- I:\Engineering\Subdivision\Wikindge\Westem Sage PUD\Prel Subd Comments.Doc Developable Area appeared to establish a continuous expansion ofan open space tract in a major drainage way. The proposed Non-Developable Area appears to break this continuity and loop it around roads and buildings to be constructed in the previously protected area. Approval to change the Non-Developable Area from that shown ofthe Wildridge Plat should include as a minimum, approval of a Resolution by the Town Council specifically approving development in the identified Non-Developable Area and establishing a redefined Non-Developable Area on the Final Plat for the Resubdivision. 2. Longsun Lane (Cul-de-Sac) - Longsun Lane currently is approximately 1720 feet long and services 55 residential units per the original Wildridge PUD. PUD Amendments have reduced this to 51 residential units per current zoning. The proposed PUD Amendment and Resubdivision would extend Longsun Lane approximately 600 feet and increase the residential units serviced to 54 from the current 51 units. Town subdivision regulations limit cul-de-sac lengths to 1000 ~et and to service a maximum of20 residential units. The 600 foot extension is proposed as a private street and the 54 total residential units serviced by the cul-de-sac with the 3 additional residential units added by the proposed PUD and Preliminary Plan is still less than the residential units served under the original Wildridge PUD. The impacts ofthis change should be minimal or essentially non-existent, but they do increase the non-conformity ofthe current subdivision and will require a vari£mee approval. The Applicant has included an application for variance from the subdivision regulations for the increased length of cut-de-sac and additional residential units serviced by the cul-de-sac. 3. Buildable Areas - The proposed extension ofLongsun Lane appears to approximately double the area on the site with slopes of40% or steeper. This has the effect ofreducing the actual building area significantly on some ofthe proposed lots. In addition it appears that access to at least three ofthe proposed lots will be about equal to or possibly worse than the existing access situation from Wildridge Road East to Lots 89 and 90. Only two ofthe proposed lots appear to have access at least as good as apparent access to Lots 54 and 55 from the existing cul-de-sac on Longsun Lane. Based upon this assessment, access to the property is at least as good ifnot better under the current subdivision than under the proposed resubdivision. 4. Drainage Easements - The proposed road extension plans include a culvert that drains across proposed Lot 1. This will require the addition of a drainage easement on the final plat. This drainage easement will divide the proposed building area on this lot and will significantly reduce the effective building site area. I:\Engineering\Subdivision\Wildridge\Western Sage PUD\Prel Subd Col™nents.Doc • Page 2 5. Other Issues - The proposed resubdivision appears to adequately address the following: a. Water & Sewer - Proposed improvements appear to be sufficient subject to approval by Upper Eagle Valley Water & Sewer District. b. Street Extension - Application indicates that Longsun Lane extension will be a private street and as such will not increase operation and maintenance costs ofthe Town. A homeowners association must be established to provide for street maintenance prior final approval and recording ofa final plat. The proposed street section appears to conform to Town Subdivision regulations with the exceptions identified above requiring variance approval. Recommendation: The above issues have been presented for your information and should be considered in your evaluation of the Proposed PUD. The final recommendations with respect the proposed resubdivision will be tailored to correspond with the final action related to the PUD. i:\Engineering\Subdivision\Wildrkige\Western Sage PUD\Prel Subd Conments.Doc •Page 3 . I. INTRODUCTION i The applicant, Jay K. Peterson, is proposing an amendment to the Wildridge Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the four residential properties located at 5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane and 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East, which according to the Town of Avon, are legally described as Lots 54,55,89, & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. According to the Wildridge PUD, the four residential properties are currently zoned for three triplexes and one duplex for a total of eleven (11) dwelling units. The applicant has met with a number of the surrounding neighbors and residents of Wildridge to gain their input on the amendment. In response to these meetings, the amendment application has twice been amended to respond to the desires of the neighbors and residents of Wildridge. The proposed amendment will have a significant positive impact on the neighborhood surrounding the development site by; • down-zoning the properties and permanently reducing the residential density in the neighborhood, • preserving existing views from adjacent properties, increasing the amount of open space and non-developable areas in the neighborhood, and; • maintaining and enhancing the existing residential quality, character, design, and scale of the neighborhood. Of greatest importance, however, through the approval of the PUD amendment, the goals and policy objectives, as outlined in the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, will be achieved to the benefit of the community. The specific amendment includes re-subdividing Lots 54, 55, 89, & 90 and creating eight (8) new single-family residential lots. The new residential lots will vary in size from over two-thirds of an acre to nearly one (1) acre in size. Future development of single-family residences will be restricted to a maximum of 4,000 square feet of building area with a minimum landscape area requirement of 35% of the lot area and maximum site coverage allowances of 40%. These development standards are more stringent than existing allowances, and as such, ensure the least amount o f impact to the existing natural landforms and vegetation of the site. The new single-family residences will be developed in the traditional-style of mountain architecture. The new homes will be complimented with a mixture of stone, stucco, wood siding, and heavy timbers, natural or earth tone colors, sloping roofs with gable ends, dormers, and deep eaves and overhangs, exposed beams, and subtle outdoor lighting. Two and four car garages will be carefully located on each of the lots to minimize the unintended consequences of providing ' vehicular access to the home sites. 1 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 . The key elements ofthe amendment include: • Compliance with the goals and policies as defined in the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan • A permanent reduction in residential density as a result of the down- zoning • Additional pedestrian access to Town of Avon owned open space • Preservation of the existing residential scale and design of the neighborhood • Protection of existing views from adjacent properties as a result of clustering development down on the lots • Preservation of the existing residential character of the neighborhood through the elimination of multiple-family structures. 2 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 ZONING ANALYSIS Existing Conditions Proposed Development (Residential Duplex/ (Residential Single-Family) Residential Low Density) Square Footage Breakdown of Proposed Uses: N/A 4,000 square feet per lot Parking: 3 spaces per unit/2 spaces per unit 3 spaces per unit plus required guest parking Maximum Densities: Lot 54 - 2 dwelling units 1 dwelling unit per lot Lot 55 - 3 dwelling units Lot 89 - 3 dwelling units Lot 90 - 3 dwelling units (11 dwelling units total) (8 dwelling units total) Minimum Lot Size: 0.25 acres/0.25 acre 27,750 square feet Maximum Building Height: 35 feet/35 feet 35 feet Minimum Building Setbacks: Front: 25 feet/25 feet- -- 10 feet/25 feet Side: 4 1.5 teeth.-5 -4et --J-n> ) 6 6(0244..,O ki.t01 / 7.5 feet Rear: 10 feeU10 feet 20 feet Maximum Site Coverage: 50%/50% 40% Minimum -._/-7 ---3, 1~ Landscape Area: 25%/25% 35% ~ Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 1 1,1 5 ' 0 \ . 1 J , ..4 / / -x-:9-<.-TLITT-(tict---« i B / -*08 »-«r-«- ~©i;~ i i ,/ i 2 1 i 5; ,1 iii S , i / : tli g,; 9 .... m :3 T-5, S / Il. 8 13:/ 1 . 0 *1 6 31 = 3 ?0,91 V T~jif ///,//~fi~z: 1' fl litix# 5.- 1 9 0 8~82 5=3,1 , 52 g : - -7, '551 ¥•:1• 9 • 1: i 5 /' / 1 : ~. | I ' ~ ~~t! fJ /,F:,7 1/ ''1 /:11/!'.'f ~L~: ~ i i *1 : D 1 47' 24 Ew. .a,31¤ A Z /5 3 2 27: 5:0:¥ I I IZ : 5 : 1;: I 12.- 4, li --11. P '' i f 1 1 1. Aqf 4545. i# 0 2 2 I 'di th'al I,-2' 2 ~ , '' - •i '') ''I 'A , *8/5 diliz 9 3 ii : 1 - 14 4 - \. \ :t'l '1 1' *t ' '# 1 E Al' 1 ·4- 41-4-,* -4-- „ 1 1 1 j :1= ':4 21 *€=22 ' f *2- 0 9 N 015,2 5 1 45 3 1 .-44 ':i 8 28; i i 25 f , , ¢ 1, |il; t,~|i |i,j il|; ''irl·:f' , '. 4 r. 3~= , I A 1,• , U 1 1,1 .ilt I . 11 : 1 1 . ' 1! 1 1 i \lt i':11':l., 151:9 'll i:/-7,1,4.1 , 1. 1 1 1 ! h. A.' 5':\':t.%'.~\.J. tr AN 1 7. '/. 2.'~ . 44:.;te:4\ /~'..44.'\'. '1/11/,1~1 1 1 f 1 1, 5 ,! i ,! ~: III:'Irl':11111,€,1~,j~11:;£.il.,CZ'.f 5,//: r )i\,1 Ill '''l . 1/.1 01 .4 j .Z, 1 + , 11 . - 1 .1 ..:Il ..:~.'(2/ 1: ' k' . III:. ~'.1 ; 1 1*i ./r .l :1, .»1.; 1.1 1,/.1 .*. 1.. '; 1 '1 91< % 14, 1 11 m *1 - -,1.1, - / ' ' . J/& 1 ' 111 1 1 ;11' ill : 1 1 - \ \\ D:,3.*1/1. C .< 1 11\.\ I 1 \ / /5 3-& m 41:L--3 ..\ l \ m tark .h ., 1, \ Ffi mt 7. 11: lid. * ris ith ' 1.' A B :Z:Z§3 1 533 'A'~ips< 4/ i. I ' 'id '11 ~ ~1~ :it, i.= 2 ' ~1 \.-=t .'i '.1, F iN .."p p''Al''' 1~~9 :' 1,'-''.1 WJ~r 'i,1 \1-1. 3//b. 14; · ' W AP P 292; · ·%'1''~l .1.7...3 -2- 2 . ~ I · . ··' 4'- t~:,1.11 O '' . /.. O LOT 50 ES 101 LOT 57 .DZ Pr' .Z.,..7 5 W.....5 ./ „~ I W'.49 'I ./. 15 U " N I /·39'59~ C -2 H 13¥hLL LOT 88 H 10¥8 III. PUD AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA The applicant is requesting a final review of an amendment to the Wildridge PUD, pursuant to Section 17.20.110K, Amendment Procedures, Avon Municipal Code, to permanently reduce the residential density of the PUD by allowing eight new single- family dwelling units on the development site in place of eleven dwelling units (three triplexes and one duplex) which are currently permitted on the site. According to Section 17.20.110H, Design Criteria, Avon Municipal Code, the following criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating a PUD amendment: 1. Conformity with the Avon Comprehensive Plan Goals and Objectives Applicant's Response: The PUD amendment is consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan. According to the Town's Comprehensive Plan, the development site is designated as "Residential" on the Overall Land Use Plan. Pursuant to the Town's Comprehensive Plan, "the Residential land use is an area intended for permanent and seasonal residential land uses, including single-family houses, duplexes, multi-family dwellings, apartments, condominiums, and mobile homes. The density of development and unit type vary within the Town in response to market conditions, site constraints (such as topography and accessibility), compatibility with existing and proposed development and zoning regulations. Residential areas should be located in convenient proximity to areas of employment, recreation, and open space. Neighborhoods should be within walking distance to daily shopping needs and employment centers, and near a public transit stop to offer a convenient alternative to automobile trips. Vehicular, bicycle, and public transit routes should be easily accessible, yet residential areas should be separated or protected from heavy traffic." The PUD amendment to allow for the development of eight (8) single-family residential dwelling units on eight (8) individually platted lots is consistent with the prescribed land use designation of the Overall Land Use Plan. The allowable maximum density of one (1) dwelling unit per lot and the single-family residential unit types are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive Plan and are compatible with the existing single-family and duplex residential development surrounding the development site. Furthermore, the various elements of the PUD amendment are consistent with the adopted goals and policies of the Town's Comprehensive Plan. According to the Town's Comprehensive Plan, in part, "The goals and policies of the Plan will be used by the Town to: 1 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 • Establish the standards and regulations necessary to define the limits and conditions of private sector development; and • Provide a clear focus for coordinating public, private, institutional and individual efforts in the development of the community." Upon review o f the adopted goals and policies of the Plan, the PUD amendment achieves and addresses the following goals and policies ofthe Town of Avon: A. LAND USE A fundamental reason for having a comprehensive plan is to clearly communicate generally where and how land uses may occur in the Town. The Land Use Plan is based on these goals and policies. Implementation is through annexation, subdivision and zoning regulations. Goal A.1 Ensure a balanced system of land uses that maintains and enhances Avon's identity as a residential community, and as a regional commercial, tourism and entertainment center. Policy Al.1 Development and redevelopment will be of a scale and intensity appropriate for the neighborhood in which it is located. Applicant's Response: Development within the PUD amendment will be single-family residential dwellings. The maximum allowable square footage of each unit shall be 4,000 square feet. Single-family residential dwellings are more compatible with the scale and intensity of the neighboring uses than are triplex dwelling units as currently permitted. Policy Al.3 Flexible zoning such as Planned Unit Developments (PUD) should be encouraged where it results in more effective use of land. However, such flexible zoning will only be allowed where it provides a benefit to the community and is compatible with surrounding development. Variations from standard zoning must be clearly demonstrated, and will be permitted only as needed to achieve effective development. Applicant's Response: A minimal front setback variation allowing one-story tall garages to encroach within the front setback is requested. No other variations to the Town's standards zoning requirements which are less restrictive than currently required are requested. The applicant, however, is proposing variations which are more restrictive than currently required. For instance, the applicant is providing an increase to the minimum lot size and the minimum landscape area requirements and a decrease to the maximum allowable site coverage allowance. The increased minimum lot size ensures that the character of the built environment of the area remains unaffected by the residential development and the forty percent (40 %) increase to the minimum landscape area requirement and corresponding 2 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 twenty percent (20%) decrease to the maximum allowable site coverage allowance assures that an ample amount of natural landscaping and open space remains in and around the development site. These variations to the standard zoning requirements result in the most effective use of land, benefits to the community and are compatible with surrounding development which in turn achieves the most effective development for the community. Policy Al.5 The community will include a wide range of residential uses including large-lot single family and duplex, small-lot single family and duplex, multifamily, and vertically integrated residential. Applicant's Response: The requested single-family residential uses will add to the already wide range of residential uses existing within the Wildridge PUD. Policy Al.6 Land for open space should be preserved throughout the community, particularly on steep slopes and other environmentally sensitive areas. Applicant's Response: As a result of this PUD amendment, more than 145,055 square feet (3.33 acres) of non-developable buffer zone area will be preserved within the Wildridge PUD. The protected area is on steep slopes, adjacent to a Town of Avon open space tract, or adjacent to existing development. Goal A.3 Maintain a compact urban form that respects and preserves the natural beauty of the valley, river and surrounding mountains, and maintains distinct physical and visual separations between Avon and surrounding communities. Policy A3.1 Development should first be directed in areas within and adjacent to established neighborhoods and developed areas. Applicant's Response: The PUD amendment is an in-fill form of development within an established neighborhood and developed area. Policy A3.7 Steep slopes in and around the community should be designated and preserved as open space whenever possible. Applicant's Response: As previously stated above, more than 145,055 square feet (3.33 acres) of non-developable buffer zone area is protected within the PUD. The protected area is on steep slopes, adjacent to a Town of Avon open space tract, or adjacent to existing development 3 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 B. Community As the community moves into the future, striking a balance between a And Economic healthy, diverse economy and a livable residential community becomes Development both increasingly challenging and increasingly important. The following goals and policies are intended to achieve that balance. Goal B.1 Enhance the Town' s role as a principal, year-round residential community and regional commercial center. Policy Bl.1 Residential neighborhoods should be maintained to a high standard of quality through effective maintenance of streets, utilities, parks and other public facilities, and through consistent application of design standards. Applicant's Response: All future residential development on the development site shall be reviewed and approved by the Town of Avon for compliance with the Town's design standards and applicable code provisions. C. Housing As the community grows, demand for housing of all types is increasing. While there is an ample supply of housing for second homeowners and upper income residents, there is a shortage of housing for middle income and year-round residents and their families. The following goals and policies are intended to help meet the variety of housing needs. Goal C.1 Provide for diverse, quality housing to serve all economic segments and age groups of the population. Policy Cl.1 Maintain and enhance the character of the residential neighborhoods of the Town. Applicant's Response: Future single-family residential development of the site shall be reviewed and approved by the Town of Avon for compliance with the Town's adopted design standards. Single-family residential residences are more compatible with the existing character of the surrounding residential uses than are multiple-family structures. The nearest triplex dwelling units or multiple-family structures to the development site and surrounding neighborhood are located near the intersection of Wildridge Road and Old Trail Road. The Town has recently acknowledged that the present and projected supply of multiple-family structures needed for seasonal and lower income workers and their families has been satisfied. Single-family residential development of the site will maintain and enhance the character of the surrounding neighborhood. 4 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 Policy Cl.2 Infill residential development should be compatible in design, scale and uses with existing neighborhoods. Applicant's Response: The single-family residential development on the site will be compatible in design, scale and uses existing within the surrounding neighborhood. The design of the homes will be two and three-story tall structures with two or three-car garages. The architectural style of the homes is intended to be reminiscent of traditional mountain design (ie., mixture of stone, stucco, wood siding, and timbers, natural or earth tone colors, sloping roofs with gable ends, dormers, and deep eaves and overhangs, exposed beams, and subtle outdoor lighting). The maximum allowable size of the homes shall not exceed 4,000 square feet. However, it is more likely the homes will be constructed to be approximately 2,800 - 3,200 square feet in size. The square footage will be spread over two and three levels, depending upon the topography and orientation of the particular lots. Maximum building height shall not exceed thirty-five (35') feet with the height ofthe home conforming to the existing topography. Existing uses in the neighborhood are residential with a mix of single family and duplex homes. The proposal to construct single-family residences on the development site is compatible with the uses in the neighborhood. In fact, single-family residences are more compatible with the existing uses than are multiple-family structures such as triplexes. Overall, the PUD amendment results in compatibility with the existing design, scale and uses of the surrounding neighborhood. F. Environment Avon is a very desirable place to live and work largely because of its exceptional natural environment. In a very real sense, the economic and social health of Avon depends upon the protection and enhancement of these resources. Goal F. 1 Make Avon's unique natural setting and its open space system central elements to its identity and structure. Policy Fl.1 Future development and redevelopment shall minimize degradation of the environment, particularly in sensitive natural areas. Applicant's Response: The layout of the eight (8) single-family residential lots is particularly responsive to the environment. As designed, degradation to the site and environment will be minimized. For example, the lots have been designed to create the most desirable site planning and building placement outcomes. The building envelopes ensure that all future residential 5 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 development is oriented parallel to the existing natural contours versus being oriented perpendicular to the natural contours. A paralleled orientation results in a building design that relates to the natural topography of the development site instead of a building design that "fights against" the contours of the site resulting in excessive cuts and substantial retaining o f the slopes. Policy Fl.2 Development should not be allowed on steep hillside areas vulnerable to environmental and visual degradation. Applicant's Response: The layout of the eight (8) single-family residential lots was designed to avoid steep hillsides and minimize visual degradation. One of the design intents of the future development is to minimize excessive cuts and fill conditions and to prevent unsightly grading of the property which results in unnatural scarring of the land forms. The homes sites have been located away from areas of steep slopes. The applicant has intentionally placed the areas of steep slopes into a non-developable area surrounding the site. Furthermore, as a result of gaining vehicular access to the development site via Longsun Lane, the steepest portions of existing Lots 89 & 90 are forever protected from environmental and visual degradation as a result of development. Policy Fl.4 Development and redevelopment will accommodate wildlife habitat, including deer and elk migration routes, or otherwise mitigate loss of habitat. Applicant's Response: Future development on the site will accommodate wildlife habitat, particularly deer and elk migration routes. Through the creation of a non- developable buffer zone on the site, the existing north/south wildlife corridor on through Tract H will be maintained and enhanced. The area of non-developable buffer zone immediately adjacent to Tract H is over two (2) acres in size. This additional two (2) acres, while not being dedicated to the Town, will serve as future open space. G. Parks, Parks, trails and open space enhance the community' s quality of li fe. Recreation and Open space preserves wildlife habitat and view corridors; trails offer Open Space walking, jogging and bicycling opportunities; neighborhood and community parks serve as places to gather and recreate. Goal G.1 Provide an exceptional system of parks, trails, and recreational programs to serve the year-round leisure time needs of area residents and visitors. Policy Gl.2 The Town will continue to evaluate and acquire parcels or easements for open space, trails and recreation. 6 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 Applicant's Response: In the initial application, the applicant had offered to grant a perpetual easement for pedestrian access across the development site. The easement for pedestrian access would have been platted along the southerly edge of Lot 1 to provide a pedestrian connection between Longsun Lane and the Town-owned Tract H to the west of the development site. Within the easement, and at the sole discretion of the Town, the applicant was offering to construct an unimproved pedestrian path from Longsun Lane to Tract H. The pedestrian path would have ensured future access to a parcel of town-owned open space thereby increasing future opportunities for recreation in the Town of Avon. However, in response to input sought on the easement from adjacent property owners and residents of Wildrdige, the applicant has removed the pedestrian access easement. H. Community Community image is a combination of natural setting, architectural design, Image and density, design of streets and walkways, signage, public art, community Design facilities, and the care and maintenance of neighborhoods and businesses. An attractive community image not only fosters a sense of identity and pride in its residents and businesses, it is critical to its long-term success as a tourism destination. Goal H.1 Establish and maintain a high quality visual image of the Town. Policy Hl.1 The Town's streets and walkways shall be designed and maintained as safe, attractive public spaces. Applicant's Response: The applicant will construct a private road through the development site off of Longsun Lane. The private road shall be constructed to the standards prescribed by the Town of Avon. The private roadway shall be of a sufficient width to safely accommodate vehicular traffic as contemplated in the Town's development objectives for private streets in Wildridge. I. Communication While most citizens are finding less time to attend town meetings, review development proposals, and generally communicate with the Town government, the need for citizens to be informed participants in the community has never been greater. Avon's small size, high land values, well-educated population and seasonal economy means that development and other local governmental decisions are often complex, and generally have greater impacts on the community than they would have in a larger metropolitan area. For these and other reasons, effective communication systems are fundamental to sustaining Avon' s high quality of life and economic health. 7 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 Goal I. 1 Establish and maintain clear communication between the Town and its citizens, business community, visitors, and other public entities. Policy Il.1 The Town Council and Planning & Zoning Commission will actively seek broad public involvement on key issues and decisions. Applicant's Response: In addition to fully complying with the Town' s requirement for public notice pursuant to Section 17.12.100, Hearings - Setting Date, Avon Municipal Code, the applicant, has sought input and comment on the PUD amendment from the surrounding neighbors and residents of Wildridge. The applicant on numerous occasions met directly with the neighbors and residents to present the plans to them outside of a public hearing and at their convenience. Written comments on the amendment that the applicant received from the neighbors and residents has been included in Section VI of this submittal packet. As a result of listening to the input from surrounding neighbors and residents, the applicant has twice made revisions to the application for the PUD Amendment. For example, the overall residential dwelling unit density has been reduced from ten (10) units to eight (8) units. The average lot size and amount of non- developable areas have been increased resulting in a greater amount of " "open space area around the homes. A private road has been incorporated into the plan to prevent any potential increase in cost of road maintenance services to the Town and its taxpayers and the potential negative impacts of a pedestrian easement on adjacent property owners has been eliminated through the removal of the proposed easement. Policy Il.3 Public meetings, access to documents and development proposals, and other interactions with the Town will be open and as accessible as possible. Applicant's Response: As previously mentioned above, the applicant met on numerous occasions with the neighbors surrounding the development site and residents of Wildridge to gain their input and comment on the amendment. In those instances when meetings could not occur, every attempt was made to facilitate an exchange of information to ensure that the development proposal remained accessible to all those seeking knowledge. In addition to being in compliance with the goals and policies above, the PUD amendment request is consistent with the recommendations for Sub-area 18, Wildridge, as outlined in the Town's Comprehensive Plan. According to the recommendations for Sub-area 18, integrated design themes for development that achieve a more unified overall appearance and the continuation of developing roadways as rural-type roads without curb and gutter, roadway lighting, or sidewalks will be achieved as a result of the PUD amendment. 8 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the Town, sub- area design recommendations and design guidelines adopted by the Town. Applicant's Response: The future development of eight (8) single-family residential dwelling units on the development site will be reviewed and approved by the Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission for compliance with the overall design theme of the Town, sub-area design recommendations and design guidelines adopted by the Town. One of the design intents of the future development is to minimize excessive cuts and filI conditions and to prevent unsightly grading of the property which results in unnatural scarring of the land forms. This goal will be achieved by allowing for a deviation from the required twenty-five (25') foot front setback requirement on the downhilllots (Lots 1- 4). As proposed, development on these lots will allow for a ten-foot (10') front setback for "one story, side-loaded" garages (non-habitable area). All other portions (hat)itable areas) of the residential structures will be required to comply with the required twenty- five (25') foot setback. A twenty-five (25') foot front setback requirement is proposed on the uphill lots (Lots 5-8). The reduced front setback requirement will reduce the negative affects of providing vehicular access to the residential units by minimizing the distance vehicles must travel on the lots to access the required parking areas. To minimize any possible negative affects of the one story, side-loaded garages in the front setbacks, a minimum amount of required landscape screening will be provided. One story, side- loaded garages are preferred over front-loaded garages as they eliminate the presence and dominance of garage doors facing the street. A second design intent is to ensure the creation of building envelopes that result in structures designed to match the contours and topography of the existing site. As proposed, the lot layout has been designed to maximize the orientation of the structures to the contours of the landforms. This design intent and lot layout will minimize the amount of grading and retaining on each of the lots and ensure compliance with the adopted design guidelines. Specifically, each individual residence will respond to the topography of the site to ensure that the residences become an integral part of the site rather than structures which are out of character with their surrounding landforms. 3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character and orientation. Applicant's Response: Future development will be designed to be compatible with the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character and orientation. All future development will be reviewed and approved by the Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission for compliance with the adopted design guidelines. To that end, the exterior design of the individual residences will be a mixture of indigenous materials such as stone, wood siding and timbers. All residential development within the PUD will be limited to 4,000 square feet of building area to prevent the construction of residences out of scale and character with the neighborhood. A request for a deviation from the 9 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 maximum allowable building height as permitted by the Residential Single-Family (RSF) zone district is not requested, and therefore, residential structures shall not be permitted to exceed thirty-five (35') feet in height, as defined by Title 17: Zoning Regulations. To ensure that adequate buffer zones are provided to create separation between existing uses and the proposed future development, a twenty-five foot (25') wide non-developable buffer zone is proposed along the southerly boundary of the PUD, adjacent to existing Lot 53. Two additional non-developable buffer zones are proposed along the westerly and northerly sides of the PUD. The one-hundred, ten-foot (110') wide buffer zone along the westerly side of the PUD is in addition to the already existing open space buffer created by the Town-owned Tract H. The northerly buffer zone is intended to prevent development from "creeping" up the slope and thus having detrimental affects on the grading and topography of the development site. A total of more than 145,055 square feet (3.33 acres) of non-developable buffer zone area is provided within the PUD. 4. Uses, activity and design which provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Applicant's Response: The uses and activities within the PUD will provide a compatible, efficient and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activities. The development potential of the PUD shall be similar to that permitted by the Residential Single-Family zone district. No deviations from the "allowed uses" of the zone district are proposed. As such, pursuant to Section 17.20.050, Zoning Regulations, only "one family dwellings" and "accessory buildings and uses" shall be permitted with the PUD without consideration of a special review use permit. According to the Official Town of Avon Zoning Map, the areas adjacent to the PUD are zoned: • East - Wildridge PUD/Residential • West - Wildridge PUD/Residential/Open Space • North - Wildridge PUD/US Forest Service • South - Wildridge PUD/Residential The single-family development of the PUD is compatible with surrounding uses and activities and results in the permanent down-zoning ofthe property. 5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD (amendment) is proposed. Applicant's Response: No natural and/or geologic hazards affect the property upon which the PUD (amendment) is proposed, therefore, no mitigation or avoidance of the hazards is required. 10 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. Applicant's Response: All future residential development on the site shall be required to comply with the adopted Town of Avon Residential, Commercial and Industrial Design Guidelines, and as may be amended from time to time. The design of the future residential development will be oriented to take advantage of solar gain and view corridors to the south and west of the development site. The lot lay out of the PUD has been designed to ensure compliance with the prescribed residential site development guidelines (ie, site design, site access, site grading, easements, drainage). For example, the lots have been designed to create the most desirable site planning and building placement outcomes. The building envelopes ensure that all future residential development is oriented parallel to the existing natural contours versus being oriented perpendicular to the natural contours. A paralleled orientation results in a building that relates to the natural topography of the development site instead of a building that "fights against" the contours resulting in excessive retaining of the slopes. The building site locations have been proposed to ensure that existing views from private property adjacent to the site are not negatively impacted. The residential building sites have been clustered low on the development site and away from the exterior perimeter of the development site. This design intent achieves the goals of the Town's development regulations without negatively impacting any existing or potential development on the adjoining properties. 7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town transportation plan. Applicant's Response: The circulation system has been designed for both vehicles and pedestrians and is compatible with the Town's transportation plan. As designed, a private road will be constructed across the development site to provide vehicular access to each of the residential lots. The private road shall be constructed to comply with minimum Town standards for road construction. Additionally, subject to adjacent property owner consent, an easement for pedestrian access will be platted along the southerly edge of Lot 1 to provide a pedestrian connection between Longsun Lane and the Town-owned Tract H to the west of the development site. Within the easement, and at the sole discretion of the Town, the applicant will construct an unimproved pedestrian path from Longsun Lane to Tract H. 8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. 11 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 Applicant's Response: Landscaping and open space have been provided within the PUD to optimize and preserve the natural features, recreation, views and function of the development site. As previously stated, more than 145,000 square feet of non- developable buffer zone area is provided within the PUD. The non-developable buffer zone area will ensure the preservation of the natural features and vegetation existing on the site and add to the aesthetic quality of the surrounding areas by providing more undeveloped area. The additional area, while visually pleasing, will also be functional in that a pedestrian access easement could be provided to allow pedestrian access to Tract H which is a Town-owned open space parcel. Currently, the only legal means of public access to Tract H is from Wildridge Road East. Individual plans for landscaping will be submitted to the Town for review and approval as part of the approved plan set for development on each of the lots. The individual plans shall be designed to fully comply with the minimum requirements for residential landscaping as prescribed in Section 4C, Town of Avon Residential, Commercial and Industrial Design Review Guidelines. At this time, subsequent to Town approval, the design intent of the landscape plans is to create harmony between each of the building sites and the natural topography and existing vegetation on the site. This intent will be achieved by selecting plant materials that are adaptable to the area and are compatible to the various climatic zones found in the Valley. Plant materials such as Colorado Blue Spruce, Rocky Mountain Juniper, Pinyon, Quaking Aspen, Serviceberry, Snowberry, Mountain Mahogany, Alpine Currant, Potentilla, Western Sage, Rabbitbrush, and other similar hardy species are proposed. The applicant is not requesting deviations or variations to any landscape area requirements. 9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the (amended) PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of future project phases. Applicant's Response: A workable, functional and efficient plan for development within the PUD will be achieved. As proposed, the first step in the development of the site will be to construct all necessary infrastructure on the site. The applicant has received preliminary approval from each of the public utility service providers for access to services (ie, ERWSD, Holy Cross, Public Service, etc.) This includes the extension of public utility services (sewer, water, gas, electric, cable, telephone, etc.) with stub outs to each lot, and the installation of the required fire hydrants. With all the necessary infrastructure construction complete, each of the residential lots will be ready for future construction and no reliance upon the completion of future project phases is necessary. 10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, police and fire protection. Applicant's Response: Adequate facilities are available to serve the eight (8) single- family residential lots. Longsun Lane provides vehicular access to the development site 12 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 with a new private road providing access to the lots from Longsun Lane. Longsun Lane { is a platted public street maintained by the Town of Avon. As an infill development within an existing platted subdivision, no annexation request or requests for expanded municipal services are required. Adequate infrastructure and platted easements exist on the development site to ensure the provision of necessary water, sanitary, and utility services. A thirty-foot (30') wide utility easement traverses north-south across the development site. This easement along with the creation of additional easements for utilities and drainage will serve the needs of the residential development on the site. The present impacts of Residential Duplex (RD) and Residential Low Density (RLD) zoning on public facilities and services, including but not limited to fire, police, water sanitation, roadways, parks, schools and transit are based upon the allowable development potential granted by the existing zoning regulations. Pursuant to the existing PUD, a total of eleven (11) dwelling units of a multi-family and duplex-type are allowed on the development site. The existing development potential will have no negative impacts on the above-described criteria as the it is decreasing in density by more than 25%. Similarly, the future impacts of single-family development on the public facilities and services, including but not limited to fire, police, water sanitation, parks, schools and transit will have no negative impacts on the above-described criteria. Most importantly, because of the net reduction in total development potential as a result of the proposal, a reduction in demand on services is expected. 11. That existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed (amended) PUD and vicinity of the proposed (amended) PUD. Applicant's Response: The existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the PUD and the area surrounding the PUD. On several occasions the applicant met with Town staff to specifically discuss traffic impacts. Pursuant to the Town's Transportation Plan, both Longsun Lane and Wildridge Road East are designated as local-street types. As local streets, these two streets are already designed to accommodate the average daily trips (ADT) generated by residential development. According to the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 4th Edition, one (1) single-family residential structure generates six (6) average daily trips. An average daily trip is defined as the average number of vehicle trips generated leaving from and returning to a designated land use for the purpose of transportation planning. 12. Describe the proposed development standards. Provide justifications for the proposed standards and describe the benefits to the Town if they deviate from Town standards. Applicant's Response: The proposed development standards for the PUD are: 13 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 Underlying Zone District: Residential Single-Family (RSF) Allowed Uses: 1. One family dwelling; 2. Accessory buildings and uses. Special Review Uses: 1. Home occupations; 2. Aboveground public and private utility installations; 3. Church. Development Standards: 1. Minimum lot size: twenty-seven thousand, seven hundred & fifty square feet (27,750 sq ft); 2. Maximum building height: thirty-five feet (35 ft); 3. Minimum building setbacks: Front: ten feet (10 ft) or twenty-five feet (25 ft)* Sides: seven & one-half feet (7.5 ft)** Rear: twenty feet (20 ft)** 4. Maximum site coverage: forty percent (40%) 5. Minimum landscape area: thirty-five percent (35%) 6. Maximum density: one dwelling unit per lot 7. Outdoor lighting: a maximum of eight (8) outdoor lighting fixtures shall be permitted on each residential lot. With the exception of up to two (2) decorative lighting fixtures located at the front door entrance to the residence, all other outdoor lighting fixtures shall be downward facing 'Willy cut-oy' fixtures which do not permit light to be emitted in an upwards direction from the fixture. All other Town outdoor lighting requirements shall apply* * * See Approved Development Plan for the minimum front building setback of each lot ** Unless noted otherwise on the Approved Development Plan Note: All other development standards and development requirements not specifically listed above and as prescribed by the Zoning Code of the Town of Avon shall apply to development within the PUD. The proposed deviations to the development standards are justified by the benefits they provide to the Town of Avon. As previously stated, approval of the PUD amendment will ensure that the goals and policies of the Town's Comprehensive Plan are achieved. As a result of the amendment, development on the site will be responsive to the topography of the area and future development on the site will be compatible with the surrounding existing and potential land uses. Specifically, the increased minimum lot size ensures that the character of the built environment of the area remains unaffected by 14 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 the proposed development and the forty percent (40%) increase to the minimum landscape area requirement and corresponding twenty percent (20%) decrease to the maximum allowable site coverage allowance assures that an ample amount of natural landscaping and open space remains in and around the development site. Additionally, the reduced front setback requirement for garages (non-habitable area) will create a more desirable streetscape appearance and prevent the unnecessary scarring of the site that often results from providing access to the site. This deviation will allow site access to be blended with the natural contours of the site and thus avoid the unintended consequences of gaining vehicular access to residential dwellings. At the same time, however, the negative impacts of multi-story development is prevented as only one-story tall garages will be permitted within the front setback. 15 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT In keeping with the intent of Goal I, Communication, Goal I.1, and Policies I1.1 & 1.3, of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, the applicant sent a letter along with the public notice for the required public hearings on the two development applications to the adjacent properties. The purpose of the letter was to introduce the applicant to the neighbors and extend an invitation to contact the applicant so that the applicant could answer the many questions that no doubt would arise and hear the concerns of the neighborhood. In addition, to sharing the PUD amendment with the neighbors, the applicant also sought input and comment from many of the residents of Wildridge. Attached in this section of the submittal packet is a copy of the applicant's letter sent to the adjacent properties and the written public comment received on the amendment. 1 Wildridge PUD Amendment May 4,2004 Jay K. Peterson 108 South Frontage Road, Suite 208 Vail, Colorado 81657 Dear Adjacent Property Owner, The purpose of my letter is to introduce myself to you and to inform you of an application that I will submit to the Town of Avon Community Development Department for an amendment to the Wildridge Planned Unit Development (PUD) in the near future. I am the owner of four lots in your neighborhood. The four lots that I own are located at 5190 & 5196 Longsun Lane and 5767 & 5775 Wildridge Road East, which according to the Town of Avon, are legally described as Lots 54,55,89, & 90, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. According to the Wildridge PUD, the four residential properties are currently zoned for three triplexes and one duplex for a total of eleven (11) dwelling units. I do not believe that multiple-family structures such as triplexes are the appropriate type of development for the neighborhood. The purpose of my application to the Town of Avon is to forfeit existing development rights and re-subdivide Lots 54, 55, 89, & 90 into ten (10) single- family residential lots. The lots will vary in size from slightly over one-half acre to nearly one-acre in size. Future development of single-family homes will be restricted to a maximum of 3,500 square feet of building area. The development standards I am proposing are more stringent than existing allowances, and as such, ensure the least amount of impact to the existing natural landforms and vegetation of the site. My intent is to build the new single-family residences in the traditional-style of mountain architecture. The exteriors of the homes will be complimented with a mixture of stone, wood siding, and heavy timbers, natural or earth tone colors, sloping roofs with gable ends, dormers, and deep eaves and overhangs, exposed beams, and subtle outdoor lighting. Two and three-car garages will be carefully located on each of the lots to minimize the unintended consequences of providing vehicular access to the home sites. In my opinion, the proposed amendment will have a significant positive impact on the adjacent properties and neighborhood which surrounds the development site by, 1. Complying with the goals and policies as defined in the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan; Wildridge PUD Amendment March 1,2004 2. Permanently reducing residential density as a result of down-zoning and forfeiting development rights; 3. Preserving the existing residential character o f the neighborhood through the elimination of multiple- family structures; 4. Maintaining and enhancing the existing residential quality, character, design, and scale o f the neighborhood; 5. Providing additional pedestrian access to Town of Avon owned open space, and; 6. Preserving existing views from adjacent properties. Given the most recent proposal whereby a developer tried to increase density from four units to ten units, you will no doubt have questions about my application. In fuct, I would be surprised if you did not. For that reason, included with my letter is a reduced copy of my proposed site plan and my personal contact information. Please feel free to contact me with your questions at your convenience. You can reach me most easily by telephone at (970) 476-0092, via fax at (970) 479-0099, or by e-mail at ikp@vail.net. I look forward to talking with you about my application. Sincerely, Wildridge PUD Amendment March 1,2004 February 15, 2004 Jay Peterson 100 S. Frontage Road Vail, Colorado 81657 Re: Proposed Resubdivision in Wildridge Dear Jay: Thank you for sharing your plans to resubdivide three tri-plex lots and one duplex lot to create ten single-family lots with me. I appreciate the opportunity to understand the project prior to hearing about it from other neighbors or seeing it on the Planning and Zoning Commission agenda. As you are aware, Diane and I live just down the street from the subj ect property. I was a little surprised to find out that the lots were originally programmed for tri-plexes and duplexes given the low-density nature of this part of the Wildridge Subdivision. I was equally surprised that the existing access to some of the lots is from Wildridge Road, which seems inappropriate given the steep slopes adjacent to the roadway. I am supportive of your proposal as a neighbor and as a professional planner because you are not seeking to increase the number of dwelling units and are in fact proposing to decrease the density overall. Additionally, I believe the proposed access is more in keeping with the neighborhood and more responsive to the topography o f the area. I believe single-family lots in this area will improve property values, improve the aesthetics ofthe neighborhood, and is more compatible with adjacent low-density residential uses. SincerelyA /1 61«-41 Dominic and Diane Mauriello 5601 A Wildridge Road Page 1 of 1 Jay Peterson From: "Phil Struve" <pstruve@clientec.net> To: <jkp@vail.net> Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 9:16 AM Subject: Wildridge Plan Jay, I am the owner and occupant of the east side duplex at 5780 East Wildridge Road (Lot 4, Block 4). I support you planned changes. Please keep me notified of the progress (or the lack thereof) in getting your plan approved. I am available to attend and speak in support of the plan. Thanks, Phil Struve 970.390.7090 pitruy¢@digite¢-11©t 3/10/2004 View Townhome Association 2170 Saddleridge Loop Avon, Colorado 81620 March 10,2004 Dear Jay: On behalf of the four owners ofthe View Townhome Association, thank you for taking the time to share your proposed plans for the amendment to the Wildridge PUD with us. In light of recent applications for amendments to the Wildridge PUD, we are pleased to see that your proposal will actually reduce the residential density permitted in Wildridge. As residents of Wildridge, we believe that opportunities to reduce density, when associated with good land planning and design, should be supported by the Town of Avon. Further, we believe that the proposal will maintain property values in Avon, continue to improve the appearance of the area and ensure that Wildridge remains a great place to call home. Please understand, however, we remain opposed to amendments which increase density. Again, thank you for sharing your plans with us and best of luck with your project. Sincerely, 47 1 8 /-) 1 , 11 +AUD I-h KNUD-2 Meredith Raub, President View Townhome Association CHARLEY AND ARIANE VIOLA 5774 WILDRIDGE ROAD EAST AVON COLORADO 970-949-5215 May 21, 2004 Town of Avon Recording Secretary PO Box 975 Avon CO 81620 Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing regarding the proposed re-subdividing of lots 54,55,89, and 90 by Jay Peterson. I strongly support this project as proposed. The benefits to all of us adjacent to this project are substantial. These benefits are as follows: Single Family Residences: By changing the zoning to single family from the currently zoned multi family residences there will be a positive impact on property values of all in close proximity to the development. Correcting a poor decision in the original plat: All of the current residences in the upper area of Wildridge are either single family or duplexes. I am not aware of any triplexes above the intersections o f Wildridge Roads East and West. The original zoning on these lots provides for triplexes. Triplexes do not fit the character of the immediate vicinity and would have a negative impact on the property values of all surrounding properties. Reduced density: An obvious goal o f the Town o f Avon benefiting everyone by reducing traffic and creating a more enjoyable living environment. The minimal impact of adding access for three additional residences on Longsun Lane is insignificant relative to the positive impact created by having single family residences adjacent to the existing properties. I think that the applicant has reduced the density to a sufficient point to justify approval. Sincerely, \1 031:Q Charley Viola RECEIVED MAY 2 4 2004 Community Development May 19,2004 Recording Secretary Town of Avon P. 0. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 Re NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Meeting - Town of Avon, June 1, 2004 Dear Sir/Madam: Unfortunately, my husband Herb Pozen and I will be out oftown and unable to attend the meeting on Tuesday, June 1, 2004. We wish to be heard on this matter by the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon by sending the following statement. Once again, we see that Mr. Jay Peterson is attempting to disrupt our neighborhood. Longsun Lane is a cul-de-sac. Those of us who live there would prefer to have it remain that way . Our position is that we have no problem with Mr. Peterson building on Longsun Lane. However, we do not want to see it made into a thoroughfare. Mr. Peterson can gain access from Wildridge Road East. Even though it may cause him hardship at first, in the long-run it will make everybody happier if he builds his property and gains access only through Wildridge Road East. We clearly do not want to see Longsun Lane overbuilt. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, I & RECEIVED :1 i MAY 2 4 2004 Mildred M. Goldktein 5171 Longsun Lane Community Development Avon, CO 81620 MMG/al 41 April 15, 2004 Recording Secretary, Town o f Avon PO Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 RE: Lots 54,55,89 & 90 6 Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Planning and Zoning Commission: I am writing to express my support for the zoning changes proposed by Jay K. Peterson for the above mentioned lots. I believe this proposal will solve several serious problems with the original platting of this area. Specifically: • The steepness o f the grade o f the lots bordering Wildridge Road would make an attractive design of three and four unit complexes almost impossible. The amount of retainage needed and scope of the excavation would result in an unattractive project completely out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. • I do not see a way to create a driveway exit onto Wildridge Road that would not be a blind entrance in at least one direction. The result would be dangerous and require a large amount of unattractive retainage. • I feel that in its current state o f completion, the Wildridge subdivision would be better served with single family homes. Sincerely, Michael Rowe ///7 A I.'·02 cr*MEEW.. &&.Fi.#ELILL<0- /%0774B Wildridge Rd. Avon, CO 81620 RECEIVED APR 1 6 ZE04 Community Development Michael C. Hayes 5183 Longsun Lane P.O.Box 904.Avon, CO 81620 ph 970 949 4132 .fax 413 832 3110 entail: h.offraol.com Recording Secretary RECEIVED Town of Avon A F?y: I F 71ft,1 P O Box 975 -1 ; A $ u L t.u L· 9 Avon CO 81620 Community Development Re: Response to Mr. Jay K. Petersen's request Legal Description of Properties: Lots 54, 55, 89 & 90- Block 4, Wildridge subdivision. Address of properties: 5190 and 5196 Longsun Lane, and 5767 and 5775 Wildridge Road East. Dear Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission, Town Council members, and Mr. Pielsticker: I am the homeowner and resident of 5183 Longsun Lane. Since becoming aware of the - proposal by Mr. Petersen's request I have taken the time and expended the energy to educate myself as to the different benefits and disadvantages in front of me. In speaking with my neighbors and Mr. Petersen, I have come to the conclusion that I do NOT support Mr. Petersen's proposal. In my conversation with Mr. Petersen he had indicated that he could consider reducing the number of units from ten to possibly eight. Even with such a reduction I will NOT support this proposal. My reasons are as follows: I begin with the obvious increase in traffic. My home is at the end ofthe cul-de-sac. It was a compelling location to purchase as I have a small child and I am expecting more children in my home. Any increase in traffic beyond what I knew was slated when I purchased my property is not welcome. I also have great concern with this proposal because Mr. Petersen's project requires the development of land that is designated as non-developable. This is a very big concern because I believe we risk setting precedent that negatively impact the landscape of development in our neighborhoods. k With regard to reduction of density- the direct impact is an increase in density on Longsun Lane. This increase in density impacts the residents of Longsun Lane unfavorably. I appreciate the opportunity to voice my concerns and again want it to be clearly understood that I do NOT support Mr. Petersen's application and project. Best regards, // Michael C. Hayes 0 Law Offices Richard S. Jalovec & Associates, Ltd. 1021 W. Adams Street, Suite 102 Richard S. Jalovec Chicago, illinois 60607 Daniel G. Austin Phone (312) 829-2300 Fax (312) 829-3729 -May 24,2004 Recording Secretary Town of Avon P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 RE: June 1, 2004 Meeting Jay Peterson - Amendment To Whom It May Concern: We are the owners of 5156 B Longsun Lane, Avon, Colorado. We strongly object to the above amendment. If granted, this would increase traffic and set a dangerous precedent of allowing development of land previously set aside for open space. Our area of Wildridge is rapidly building up. There is no reason to increase the size of the area to be built upon by allowing this amendment. We are unable to attend the meeting but urge the Planning and Zoning Commission to reject this proposal. Very truly yours, Jennifer Ann Jalovec Richard S. Jalovec JAJ&RSJ/kr RECEIVED -JUN 0 1 2004 Community Development C Gore Range t':41 Surveying, Lic '.7.47'1:23*-9·41-'74 i :4" 1 RECEIVED JUN 0 1 2004 6/1/04 Community Deveiopment Recording Secretary Town of Avon PO Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 Re: Lots, 54,55,89 and 90, Block 4, Wildridge To Whom It May Concern: I am not only a resident of Longsun Lane in Wildridge, but also a Professional Land Surveyor. I have reviewed the proposed PUD amendment for these lots and have the following comments both from a professional standpoint as well as that of a resident. Fourteen years ago when I purchased my lot on Longsun Lane there was only one house built. Mine was the second, and over the years many nnore have been constructed. Along with each home's construction was the never ending flow ofconstruction vehicles and trucks associated with the project. However, we (the residents of the street) all knew that someday this would cease once all ofthe lots were developed. The related impact on our lives from the new construction had a limit. With the construction of the proposed extension of our road and increase in lots and building sites, this endpoint of construction impact extends far further than previously established and accepted. The long term effects of this project will affect the residents of the area for many more years to come. This is not just a question of changing the density from eleven units to eight, and making the current established lot configuration more convenient and profitable for the developer, it actually will increase the number of overall construction sites from four to eight. Currently the lots are zoned for a potential of eleven units total on the four lots combined. These units would be constructed on four building sites in the form of four structures; one on each lot. Two of these would be accessed from Wildridge Road East, two from Longsun Lane. This proposed new development would actually increase the total structures and construction sites utilizing Longsun Lane from two to eight. What may appear as a decrease in density and overall impact will actually be a considerable increase. It has a far more significant impact on the established neighborhood that will be felt for many years to come. When a subdivision is approved, the overall plan for land use, density and lot configurations are established. These lots have established access points and developable areas. Changes to established building sites, access points and traffic flows greatly impact all that we were lead to believe when we chose to live here and build where we have. One of the primary roles of government is to protect the health, safety and welfare of the community. And while this proposal may not affect the health of the community, it does have a 953 South Frontage Road West • Suite 106 • Vail, CO 8i657 ' (970) 479-8698 • (970) 479-004 5 fax , negative impact on the safety and welfare. The extensive increase in traffic caused by the additional construction and the additional residents and their associated guests and services will increase the risks and hazards to children, pets and all of us considerably. Welfare is not just a protection ofthe financial value of our property, it is the protection of all that we value. Views, privacy, traffic, a feeling of comfort and safety are all values that we have. We chose this street for our homes with full knowledge of what to expect for development and potential negative impact on our lives. It is the responsibility of our representatives in government to protect these rights. Our rights, beliefs and lifestyles need to be protected first, before the desires of a developer to create a development from which he is the sole beneficiary. We all purchased our land with the belief in these established items. Changing these lots and open space areas would take away those rights we currently have and are due. The design and layout of the subdivision approved and accepted for Wildridge did not include a potential extension and increase in structures on Longsun Lane. Approval of such would be a denial ofthe rights, benefits and privileges due to all of us. Sincerely, Sam Ecker 5129 Longsun Lane 5110 Longsun Lane P.O. Box 1120 Avon Co 81620 May 25,2004 Recording Secretary Town ofAvon P.O. Box 975 AVON Co. 81620 Dear Sir, I am writing this letter in support of the rejection of the PUD amendment regarding lots 54,55.89 and 90 in block four Wildridge. I feel that this new plan will increase traffic congestion on our cul de sac lane. The original plat would have five units accessing our lane, the new one eight houses. The increased construction traffic as well as the additional home owner traffic, after the completion, would be hazardous for the many children. I am strongly opposed to the "swap" ofthe undevelopable land which separates the upper and lower lots. This area contributes the open space which Wildridge is noted for. Shifting ofthe location in this manner,to my knowledge has never been requested or been granted. There is already access to lots 88 and 89 from East Wildridge Road. Changing Town policy on access to non developable land to ease a contractors' access to me seems frivolous. Our Town Map states states that these areas prohibit any road or house footprint to impinge ofthem without special approval. To do this will set a precedent for the other lots which have "non developable" land on them. Yours truly„ il F*berta Schwartz RECEIVED MAY 2 7 2004 Community Development To: Town Clerk, Town ofAvon Date: June 1, 2004 Ref.: Jay Peterson Wildridge PUD Amendment I am writing you to voice my major two reasons for opposing the proposed PUD Amendment before the Avon Town Zoning Commission. First, when we purchased our home on Longsun Lane we contacted the Town of Avon Community Development office to ascertain the potential development of the undeveloped land surrounding our property. We were please to find that a large portion ofthe land between us and Wildridge Road was designated as "non-developable" and therefore would be left natural. This land creates a large buffer between Longsun Lane and Wildridge Road guaranteeing us that the natural environment that surrounds our property would be retained and we can continue to enjoy the natural wildlife that use this land. Second, in the past, we have bought several properties located on cul-de-sacs. We prefer them. Allowing a street to go offofLongsun's cul-de-sac changes the nature of living on a cul-de-sac. Having all lots, 54,55,89 and 90, accessed off of Longsun Lane would increase the traffic on Longsun from that of five dwelling units to that of eight dwelling units or an increase of 60%. The reason that we bought on a cul-de-sac road is that the traffic is limited to those who live there. We have made a major decision based on the information we found at the Avon Community Development Office and quite frankly would feel as if we had been stabbed in the back by the Town of Avon ifthis PUD amendment were approved. Please rejpct this application. Karen McDevitt Lot 53, Block 4 5191 A Longsun Lane FROM : M FAX NO. : 17753247321 Jun. 01 2004 01:04PM Pl JUM. O 1 1009 -- 5 Jv Auled l-·,0 j up thio LE Col f VLE-»00-4 elgk Iva...01 , 3©oj -TO L re»~rol.In 9 5.e--4 Ll--«\4 -TD l»vi 0 2- 63401/1 U , Cw, -b) 4 (A rn b Axiob (1 -4 S-' G j LD nt] Su.r-\ Lot «- 14- d A IAA c* o sed. 4© 4-L ~ 0'~ Gl Wt/PE€ MA1* T oov~\« U te 4 r -cj ukr ?wts) A (/u-j ~~~-{- , --' -1 ann C O A LUAL. 2-000( C.470 ,<-- Me 0--col- >a·A- Ir/t,,- -@.Efc- -tle-k Oce u LA 4/ rfer f.5 va 4,3- 4 + (Qu/hu-~ 0-4 0 4 C/vn 6 41 A' C U.-t TZ",1 45 j L 4/1 3 11 2.a »4 4-u 46 0-7 5 f *1 .9 SfeeiN) 1 4.- -*e-£-04 < 1 L Obf 4 i v~~0 .0.- 0 04€- 4 61«al-I~e~ c.,~ 41 4x c ) h-€12 - -2 900\A L eX hv f .l-L 9 lo dul,~, C 0 urd \ 1»1 A L A O 24 H Yaq.* ta 69·° AL- 9 Cux k-V V F L 1 ~0 l..A.3-A 9 non o'\ 2 j-e- \MY#UU A FA Df «0' (515 4'g 62 kt 4 1-A ¤1 \A- , L._ 0 U---Ut, <7- ~sh A et' Un' P/1 M , -- -1 . A Al To: Town Clerk, Town of Avon Date: June 1, 2004 Ref.: Jay Peterson Wildridge PUD Amendment I am writing this memo solely to address the issue of precedence as it pertains to this application because the developer has misrepresented it and the Town of Avon has downplayed it. There is a notation on Town of Avon Lot/Block maps of"Non-developable" land. "Non-developable" land is an area of a lot where no road, or development footprint can encroach unless the Town gives special approval. There were 33 lots in Wildridge with a non-developable land designation on parts ofthem when Wildridge was laid out. 22 ofthose 33 lots have been developed and until this application, to the best of my knowledge, the Town has never been asked nor granted permission to build on the non-developable area on any ofthem. 11 lots remain including the four under consideration here. By virtue of this application, the developer is asking the Town of Avon to approve a precedent setting variance. P&Z and the Town Council would set a precedent ifthey recommended approval and granted a variance to allow this developer to intrude on non-developable land as he is requesting on lots 55,89 and 90 and ofcourse the pipe stem driveway off ofthe Longsun cul-de-sac is his means of accessing lots 89 and 90. If the Town allowed access and therefore broke the precedent of not allowing non- developable property to be built upon, then it is reasonable to expect that the remaining seven undeveloped lots, mostly on upper Wildridge Rd., might also ask for a similar variance oftheir non- developable area. Perhaps even existing dwellings might be altered to take advantage ofthis valiance. It opens up a can ofworms and is clearly not the right thing to do. Finally with respect to this issue, it is disingenuous on the part ofthe developer to refer to the non- developable area as "open space" on his drawings as though he could simply trade this for an equivalent area within the four lots of his choosing. Please do not allow this precedent setting variance. 4 *LL?d Mac McDevitt Lot 53, Block 4 5191 A Longsun Lane Staff Report Minor Project Am COLORADO June 15, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report Date June 8,2004 Project Type Minor Project - Duplex Design Change Legal Description Lot 16, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision Address 4040 Eaglebend Drive Introduction The Final Design for this project was approved at your May 20*,2003 meeting. The residence is approximately 6,200 square feet in size, includes bridges and decks, and sits on the Eagle River. Some of the materials proposed include: lap siding, asphalt shingles, and stucco. The applicant submitted plans for Building Permit on June 2nd, 2004 and there have been design and architectural changes made to the duplex since the approval of Final Design. River rock was originally proposed to wrap the base of the duplex and was to be used on the pillars for the decks. This stone feature on the south, east and west sides of the duplex has been changed and would be replaced with stucco. The stone feature on the north side of the duplex will remain as originally proposed. Two shades of stucco are proposed. The upper level floor plan on the east unit has been changed to include an additional 160 square feet of living space. The upper level east elevation Final Design Plans included a master bath, with walk out deck. The master bath and deck has been replaced with a master bedroom. The upper level east elevation deck on the Final Design plans has been moved to the upper level south elevation on the Building Permit plans and was increased to a 250 square foot deck. Plans will be available for review at your June 15*,2004 meeting. Design Review Considerations According to the Commission's Procedures, Rules & Regulations, Section 4.10, the Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of this project: 1. The type and quality of materials of which the structure is to be constructed. A variety of quality, durable building materials is proposed which include: stucco, asphalt shingles and wood siding. This application also proposes earth tone colors, which is encouraged by the Town guidelines. 2. The appearance of proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways, with respect to architectural style, massing, height, orientation to street, quality of materials, and colors. No negative impacts should be experienced as viewed from adjacent properties. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 HEART of the \'ALLE'I Lol 16, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision, Minor Project - Duplex Design Change June 15th, 2004 Planning & Z : Commission Meeting Page 2 0 f 2 3. The objective that n- -aprovement be so similar or dissimiiar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. As proposed, the the minor design change should not impair monetary or aesthetic values in the vicinity. 4. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. The duplex appears to conform to the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs of the Town and appears consistent with the Design Guidelines. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of this duplex design change in Lot 16, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision with the following condition: 1. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please do not hesitate to call me at 748.4030 or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, <tt-t>(*4,Lit Kenneth Kovalchik Planner I Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Staff Report Minor Project AV#11 COLORADO June 15, 2004 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report Date June 9,2004 Project Type Minor Project - Additional Parking / Landscaping Legal Description Lot 11, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning PUD Address 3078 Wildridge Road Introduction The applicant, Fred Hitler, has submitted a Minor Project application for the addition of three (3) parking spaces, and modifications to the existing landscaping on the above-referenced property. The application under consideration follows another design application to add ten (10) parking spaces which staff denied approximately a month ago. Original Application - May 4,2004 Mr. Hiller originally submitted for the addition of ten parking spaces to the 4-Plex project. As can be seen in the attached denial letter (dated May 14,2004), staffs concerns with a "home occupation" being run on the property without a Special Review Use permit and the potential for junk vehicles being stored are outlined. Also attached to this report is the Site Plan from the original parking addition plan. Current Application - June 8,2004 The application under review proposes to add three (3) parking spaces to the project and to install landscape berms between the parking areas of each unit of the complex. The project is currently in excess of the Town parking requirements with fourteen (14) surplus spaces. Also part of this application is the deletion of portions of the existing landscape berms in order to accommodate snow removal operations. Attached to this report is the revised Site Plan and some photographs ofthe existing site conditions. Design Review Considerations According to the Commission's Procedures, Rules & Regulations, Section 4.10, the Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of this project: 1. The type and quality of materials of which the structure is to be constructed. This application proposes to add three 7' X 20' sections of concrete to match the existing adjacent paved surfaces. The parking surface would be the same type and quality of the already installed parking areas. The landscaping berms would be similar to the existing berms and could alleviate the current problems with residents parking in the unpaved landcape sections between each unit's parking areas. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 HEART-67-ihe VALLE; A Lot 11, Block 1, Wildridge Subu,gision, Parking and Landscaping Minor Project June 15,2004 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 2 of2 2. The appearance of proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways, with respect to architectural style, massing, height, orientation to street, quality of materials, and colors. The appearance of excess vehicles on a 4-unit project may have a negative visual impact from the roadway and adjacent properties and may help to facilitate a non-conforming use. By cutting away at the already established landscape berms (which help to shield the current parking areas from adjacent properties) the appearance of a line of parked vehicles may diminish the appearance of the property. 3. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. It is staff' s opinion that this project already has an excess of surplus parking and this improvement may further lessen the character of the property to a point that aesthetic values could be impaired. 5. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. This parking does not appear to conform to the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs of the Town. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the additional parking spaces and landscaping modifications for Lot 11, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision due to conflicts with the following Planning and Zoning Commission review criteria: 1. The appearance of proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways, with respect to architectural style, massing, height, orientation to street, quality ofmaterials, and colors. 2. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. Alternately, to address the parking concerns (parking in the non designated landscape islands), the applicant should install landscape berms in the areas between the current parking spaces. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please do not hesitate to call me at 748.4413 or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, (6t«311 Matt Pielsticker Planning Technician Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 / /, J t... Le \ / X \ 3 - 70£ \/ JI I I ' f©- - 5 4*<n A \ r 50·<· - A «62\N>j 0 /////// //// / 4 I. ~,LY 7/ 1 A <091, 03 I 1 , -1- -- 'I. -I- I. I D > N M :i 7-44 f) 4 I , ./ / ' I /: -. A % t - t -02-,=I OO 14 \ :;.,-,/I///<Hz) )\ 1\LfA p 4 , 0. . .A«·a 1 1 1 /1 1 1 \ A\V - rhe ' / . Xy<» 1\41 -1 r --. 6 1}A 7, 2. W - 734/A a ~ . v v vT .1 M!1 <- 4 95»K- \ Er< - l 2 A 440 - * -3 ~-42 ki 0.- .- B -- - a~ ' W 798> ~ C I .t, + k ':' ul .A ' >·246:21 1 2 a 4, . / t/ /L f -7 , // L. I k. I £ 13491*9 / 4 / , I I 07 X Y- 1 ',7-\M-==24-, ~413 r r=<2 3 i 8-50 2 I. e , ~ + I I. 11 b W 7=7/ .4il <33\.~ Lb f 0 , .' . '%942 1-7 ' 0 / '1 rr ,-,4 - ' , 1 il , ./ 2 4 0 - 1 W £ '5 5 %;1 k~% C.0. I , 4/2 2/ /1, 2 & 23 a.zm € 0 0 ~ '~ gW 3 m *21 , / ·' AL 19' 44 , 0 F- <D <30 12 9 9 22 1% 9 Ati~ / -aN 14, t.my ' U 00 4 <C IL <C U- 2 i . 4 m 14,7*6 , -7*A47*2 ggl* 100 ag et) .. F='7 Post Office Box 975 - 970-748-4000 400 Benchmark Read - Aron. Colorado 8 1620 COLORADO 970-949-9139 Fav 970-845-7708 TrY May 14, 2004 Fred Hiller P.O. Box 4404 Avon, CO 81658 Via Facsimile: 970.245.2477 (hardcopy tofollow) RE: MINOR PROJECT DENIED FOR ADDED PARKING SPACES LOT 11, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION Dear Fred: Staff has reviewed your application for the following modifications at 3078 Wildridge Road, Wildridge Subdivision. Proposed Modification: Expanded Parking on Vista Mayor 4-Plex Property Action: Denied According to the Town's calculations, there are currently fourteen (14) additional parking spaces above what is required by the Town's Off-Street Parking Requirements (Zoning Code Section 17.24.020 (C)). The current breakdown of parking spaces for the Vista Mayor Townhomes is as follows: Required Parking (4-Plex): 10 spaces Provided Parking (5/12/04): 24 spaces Proposed Parking with this application: 34 spaces It appears that the additional spaces requested with this application would support potential home occupations. A Special Review Use (SRU) permit is required in order to operate a " Home Occupation" on the subject property. Additionally, adding ten (10) more spaces would further encourage non-conforming uses and the unsightly storage of junk vehicles. Thank you for your application. Please contact me at 970.748.4413 if you have any questions or require additional assistance. Kind Regards, ----7 Matt Pielsticker Planning Technician Att: Zoning Code Section 17.24.020(C) & 17.08.360 F:\Design Review\Wildridge\WR Block l\L! 1 Bl WRadditionalparking denial.doc HETETREALLEY Zoning - Off-Street Parking and Loading Section 17.24.020 (c) Off-Street Parking Table. Off-Street Parking Table C j) Residential Land Use Minimuin Requirements a. Per dwelling unit: 1. Single-family or duplex 2 spaces/unit 3 spaces/unit for units over 2,500 sq. ft. not including garage 2. Multifamily building and townhouses a) Studio 1 space b) One bedroom 1 !4 spaces -~ c) Al] others 2 spaces b. Per accommodation unit including lockoffs: 1. One bedroom 1 space 2. Over one bedroom 1 space plus h space for each additional bedroom in excess of one c. Guest parking spaces: 1. Multi family and townhouses - a) 3-5 units 2 spaces b) 5-10 units 3 spaces c) 1 1-15 units 4 spaces d) 16-20 units 5 spaces e) 21-25 units 6 spaces f) over 25 units 7 spaces plus 1 space for each 5 units in excess of 25 up to a maximum of 10 additional spaces d. Mobile home parks: 2 spaces/mobile home space e. Timesharing units: 1 space per 600 square feet but not less than 1 space per unit unless reduced as part of a mixed-use project ~ reduction. (2) Commercial Land Use Minimum Requirements a. Shopping and convenience goods retail 4/100 sq. ft. GLFA b. Personal services and repair est, 3/1000 sq. ft. GLFA Businesses and professional services Office buildings and banks (except drive-in banks) c. Drive-in banks 3/1000 sq. ft. GFA plus 5 storage spaces/outside teller window or drop station d. Restaurants - food consumed within structure 1/60 sq. ft. of seating area only, outside patio used with a bar or restaurant do not require any additional parking. e, Restaurants - carry-out only - food consumed on 10/1000 sq. ft. GFA premises f, Restaurants with drive-up window I /60 sq. it. of seating area plus storage for 7 car/drive-up window g. Service stations 2/1000 sq. ft. GFA h. Commercial recreation facilities, bowling alleys 4/alley plus 1 /employee Tennis courts 4/court plus 1 /employee Handball and racquetball courts 2/court plus 1/employee Swimming pools 20/1000 sq. ft. GWA Skating rinks 10/1000 sq. ft. GFA (3) Industrial Land Uses Minimum Requirements Manufacturing plants, warehousing, wholesaling 1/800 sq. ft. GFA establishments, freight terminals 17-34 Zoning - Definitions Section 17.08.270 17.08.270 Dwelling unit. 17.08.320 Garage, private. < Dwelling unit nleans: Private garage means an accessory building for the storage of motor-driven vehicles used by occu- (1) One (1) or more rooms, including pants of the main structures. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) cooking facilities, intended or designed for occupancy by a family or guests independent of 17.08.330 Garage, public. other families or guests, or Public garage means a building other than a pri- (2) An aggregate of accommodation units vate garage, used for the care, repair or mainte- provided as follows: nance of motor-driven vehicles, or where such vehicles are parked or stored for remuneration, hire a. Three (3) accommodation units shall or sale within the structure. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) be counted as one (1) dwelling unit. 17.08.340 Grade, existing. b. Two (2) accommodation units in association with a dwelling unit shall be Grade, existing means the existing or natural counted as one (1) dwelling unit. (Ord. 91- topography of a site prior to construction. (Ord. 10 §1(part)) 91-10 §1(part)) 17.08.280 Easement. 17.08.350 Grade, finished. Easement means an ownership interest in real Grade, finished means the grade upon comple- property entitling the holder thereof to use, but not tion of a project. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) possession, of that real property for one (1) or more - --/-\ specific purposes, public or private. (Ord, 91-10 < 17.08.360 Home occupation. § 1(part)) Home occupation means an occupation, profes- ~ 17.08.290 Employee housing. ~ sion, activity or use that is conducted within a ~ dwelling unit and is meant to produce income or Employee housing means that housing used ~ revenue, or any activity associated with a nonprofit exclusively for persons employed in the Avon area. ~ organization which: (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) (1) Does not produce noise audible outside ~ 17.08.300 Family. ~ the dwelling unit where such activity is taking ~ place; Family means any individual, or two (2) or more persons related by blood or marriage or ,==1~(2) Limits the amount of customers, visi- ~ between whom there is a legally recognized tors or persons, other than the occupants, to no ~ relationship, or a group of not more than four (4) more than five (5) per day. In the case of day ~ unrelated adults occupying the same dwelling unit. care, no more children than allowed by the State ~ (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) license for a child care home (a State license is l I also required to operate a child care home); 17.08.310 Garage parking. Parking garage means a building, either public or private, used only for parking of motor vehicles. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) 1 0 U 17-6 Supp. 3 Zoning - Definitions Section 17.08.360 (3) Does not cause the visible storage or (3) Does not require alteration to the resi- parking of vehicles or equipment not normally dence to satisfy applicable Town fire or building associated with residential use, which shall codes, or County health regulations; include but is not limited to the following: trucks with a rating greater than three-fourths (4) Does not require or allow any signs to (34) ton, earth-moving equipment and cement be visible from the outside of the property; mixers; (5) Does not change the appearance or -~ (4) Does not alter the exterior of the prop- residential character of the structure. erty or affect the residential character of the neighborhood; Any activity that meets the above definition shall be considered an accessory use, and shall not -) (5) Does not interfere with parking, access require Town approval. (Ord. 98-3 §V) or other normal activities on adjacent properties, or with other units in a multifamily residential 17.08.370 Hospital. development; Hospital means an institution providing health -~ (6) Does not require or allow employees to services primarily for human inpatient medical or work on the property; surgical care for the sick or injured and including related facilities such as laboratories, outpatient (7) Does not require alteration to the resi- departments, training facilities, central services dence to satisfy applicable Town fire or building facilities and staff offices that are an integral part of codes, or County health regulations; the facilities. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) (8) Does not require or allow any signs to 17.08.380 Hotel, motel and lodge. be visible from the outside of the property. (Ord. 98-3 §VI; Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) Hotel, motel and lodge mean a building contain- ing three (3) or more accommodation units, 17.08.365 Home office. intended for temporary occupancy of guests. Accessory use facilities may consist of an office, Home office means any occupation, profession laundry facilities used by the occupants, recreation or other activity that takes place in a dwelling unit facilities, a lobby or lounge, kitchen and dining and is meant to produce income or revenue, or any facilities and similar accessory uses commonly activity associated with a nonprofit group or found in association with a commercial hotel, or corporation which: lodge operation and meeting requirements of the particular zone district in which the building is (1) Does not produce noise audible outside located. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) the dwelling unit where such activity is taking place; 17.08.390 Kennel. (2) Does not cause or require customers, Kennel means any lot or premises on which four delivery persons, employees or any person, (4) or more dogs, of at least four (4) months of age, other than the occupants of the dwelling unit, to are kept. (Ord. 91-10 §1(part)) enter the property on which the dwelling unit is located; 17-7 qunn 3 Cal - . 21 '. 4, . .. . .y.... 4 1 . ¥ .A . A. I ,» Fk-= I;LI . m &2% I'--- -1-% . . #Yrphtz.3. ~' * 12..rEr. 1-r -4,- 0 42 -T I.- 1.10,1- -2-494'81 z 1 7 I 0 . 6 'f....V/'+ ....AN i .9.-1- 1 -- - ..F-72'Athie.*1- , . -- 5 1 1 264 1 f**6,41.-I, ,rh-12· 2 4 4-'Ll- ~- I In'.Rl.rif-:3, t.'I> -LI m.7-el,4-1,!1 2''klE,1 '243 Nalj z~_~wrK*43~* ci-4=,P~tlp.q.-T¢, - - 1/ - - 1 2214 7-1 '.'.1.11 12.0,1 1 1 - ' - J 9 3'f .f -- ~ * 71-04.1 . I 11 r 4 11- .. . 1 I . 4 7 :- I. . 1 ,% . ·a C.· -* ,-/ '.• 't'·- C •- -4--- ,·, . . 4 •.4 - 4.. .. · ... .. ' 4 24 .0 /,i ~ :94 + .: 3 4:4,·. + ' *M.»abs.Cal : 4/16. A :Lu '79.: f. t . . - . . ... 4, .. 1. .* :$ ...31 f It *.. .... p 1 . . E. -- -- . 1. . 1 1 + 3 f . 54 . - 1 .. ,. £< 54.i -. I '·-/ ::- 4*E. · · d.214 t. 1 - . "'I-CK, - - .6 ~-. :at':11--I. .AL:i' ''£ /' ') 1 + l.1.7 . .rt 4 - r #4*fh -Urr.-' .0+251/* 6 ~E Alt €11*-t.Ut,1 16660. 1 p 1 ¥gi.k 4 h 3 -T-1 ·p-61..c· -t 0-4 - ,- 1 I T :JA,Tifir,42.4346,2 k 4 43« + Lityll< Sy- 3.- . ' j- i 4 I . I 4 4.rd"447 2,4* ." v122 --4--r.:-3-- 4.- 1 - 44-2/9 -- j - 4 .%4.- 1. - F - -1 - 1 -I. ·./.-4... Nt g*: , 14"f 31* 0. i. -- 658- . =* I , 2 4-"11*-it - 4, j. 1--1,04'1,6-4,544 7.,-959'PKEfit#JL- &.'$* -- - -~--- '9•3*-f£-,I-.+4*¢-,1-1..~f~11*rijFJI;$~ ~ z.*8:49il~a-'w#~s-: --tic - t.:44443 24¢Lfy . f - 4. 4 ~, -*SK .-3-,pittlit>Ii>*fiL<* 42-_ A-6 1 .*be;: IM-- 16-13. ...€4.-34 MUS®k--2** ~ --*--ar,m:*MA wimi,;41~~,;;e: 45%*7~.:01.1-#411'r,-p~-14_44·itil?144- ---';*4--*r:~f~~.4-1 008-, 3*.90 ij 47,4,5, AX: is:2.626: 0·4, . .' 3*,:('tt>1.:*5_ 015~4.vvi.*,2v*.-r=~E' *2~~p-~ , Att ~7~t-·i..~41. 04%*.4''V 4~1~~~~~ - .1 L- - 61-2. - - 1'.b.,~21€CY,E~ . . %. I . ..V 2- -4,7 ..F-3 0 9*RA- ~ -14-vimj.,.04*27<,Ii,I,0. K':14721..~ +...... 9 4-/ 3:17?, 1. 11 i°Of Jg U =r 00 ... I.. m * 21 0, 0 LUF 9 0 -D .=h WE m -9-2 A j 7% L I 2 0 I A 600 /2>,r# Vi.... 1./- - \ N~ ' j - W 1 (.]%0 , 'v 1 „. + 'X 31> F , . .\LI N. 0 -'04.,4-*--+I- ~ 4/48 m -2 14 , " i ZL- . t. '1 / .A '1 . .4 I / , . '' 9 , L''·' A D.J 4,-\ / 41 / 0 'IJ -,-6 f 1 lo :4 -14 fr VI L-4 1 , , LU (3 , , R j lp- 7 - 1 e k %4\ 1 1 ' In 2.,11-. ). \ lt= j ! ...1 1.1,0 1 12.-r M 't f 'r 11,1 (Of % 1 . 1 i $ 9 4 i 21 : '1 0 1 r 1 4 // 43*1 - A ,/ + DP 4/1 , 1 1 - '2,0 4 j . ..: 1 . 4 * EaUL:39...... - 45/-" ~ .~ 1 + 0 i 6 5:E E 94.. 125 , / 1* 7 : :Z2 : -- 44 1{ 1 -- - f' 35.1 - - - 21:2 *i t 0, lit; ge : RE" il; c: :li :38 4 3% E 11 - 222 ; 4* i 0 4, i ,. Uhhi 1. Li - 12=51 9.231 lihi.: 1 k . P: - 2/F S ti §51 ii3 · HE ill fZ fi i !1 2 : ?t 11 N & 9.(1 4 u ZV I h €mo,0- . mn 141%114. 1%4,8.4 %4. 1 11%.,1 1 1%1.*11-0 -KH'.".01~1 / 1/ 4///014-1 /4/4 A 11,11 .. IN EAW AD %4 1% 1 •%06 1... ri./1 '.11 TOWN OF AVON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Tri" 11411 nler .le,31101 '1).11 1,1 4,11,~ 1)'1*U.O.>M slu! ensuo) pue se!1#unuoddo 1- ry rN -0 f' I. . . i ee 5 € & 1 1 2 5 : 3 f .W-- Saff U -8 3 I.. 3, ' I e 3 - r /. 51 7 ·: .i 2 4 , $ I 6 0«f 2/0 < ; AN o Z Coy ,> 1 0 1 07 1 i U , 1- LA . 0 Z f !1 -2 4 er r/4 &!jii 310 1 Town Center Regional Commercial Neighborhood Commercial €2000- . pases-]01!s! A Industrial Commercial t..lul a.5 TOWN OF AVON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /0 '14%RETA ueld asfI puel aA!1eu-lal~¥ 1 1- Zt ·-' 1Lf?,4, - W E E 0 U - f .. ..¥ 14 - Ift , 0/ 4 '. 11 - 0. , ¢ 2 - 4: 4.X di 0 :1 y k Or- co 0 C. '. I 1, LA ' · L · '0:< * . "T- .2429 L-7 < Z / I /1 -1 . 1131 - ID 1 Residential Low Density Neighborhood Commercial €10 08- . 0)!/ua S-lin d 6l ~ Govt'ark, Employee Housing Town Center ~ Open Space /Parks Regional Commercial ~ Res,dential HIgh Density ~ Indu Land Use 7. 346 TOWN OF AVON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4 1 ueld asn puel aAileuiallv pua601 Memo TO: Planning and Zoning Commissioners From: Tambi Katieb, AICP, Community Developme'3~313« Norman Wood, Town Engineer~~~ Date April 29,2004 Re: Update on Council Direction from Building Community Worksession Background: Staff will update you on a number of anticipated changes to the design guidelines, zoning code, and review policies that you will see over the next month related to discussions that have occurred with Town Council and the building and development community. F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Memos#2004\Review Changes Update.doc Menlo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Avon Planning & Zoning Commission CC: Larry Brooks, Town Manager, Jacquie Halburnt, Asst. Town Manager From: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk Date: June 14, 2004 Re: Article from Town Attorney John Dunn Summary: John Dunn asked me to forward you a copy of the attached article for your review. GOVERNMENT AND Al NISTRATIVE LAW NEWS ... i.i Advising Quasi-Judges: Bias, Conflicts of Interest, Prejudgment, And Ex Parte Contacts 3 by Gerald E. Dahl i r i E . 4 f This column provides information ' This article identifies the nature of certain due process to attorneys dealing with various pitfalls facing quasi-judicial decision-making bodies, state and federal administrative including bias, conflicts of interest, prejudgment, and agencies, as well as attorneys repre- senting public or private clients in exparte contacts. Suggestions are made to deal effectively the areas of municipal, county, and with these problems to ensure a fair, impartial, and school or special district law. defendable decision. ~ ocal government attorneys often matter to be considered is quasi-judicial, face the challenge ofguiding elect- rather than administrative or legisla- ed and appointed decision-mak- tive. The due process and deliberative ing bodies when they act in a "quasi- protections discussed in this article ap- judicial" capacity. These bodies typically ply only if the matter is quasi-judicial. comprise town and city councils, boards Administrative matters involve day- of county commissioners, planning com- to-day decisions, such as approving con- k missions, and boards ofadjustment. Their tracts, hiring staff, and setting utility members ("quasi-judges") are usually rates. legislative matters affect large ar- unpaid volunteers (for planning com- eas (such as multiple parcels of proper- Co/umn Editors: missions and boards of adjustment), or ty) or set broad policy directives. Exam- elected officials (for town or city councils ples of legislative matters include adop- Carolynne C White ofthe Colorado and boards of county commissioners). tion of an entire or general amendment Municipal Ikague-(303) 831-6411, Quasi-judges are also referred to in this to a land use code, comprehensive plan, cwhite@cmt.org; Brad Bailey,Assis- article as "board members." leash law, or general parking ordinance. tant CityAttorney, City ofLittleton- Quasi-judges generally have no judi- By contrast, quasi-judicial actions ap- (303) 795-3725, bbailey@littleton cial background and little government ply general rules to a specific interest, gouorg; Tiffanie Bleau, Denver, experience. Nonetheless, they are ex- such as a zoning change affecting a sin- an attorney with Light, Harrington & pected to actwith muchofthesame for- gle piece ofproperty, a variance, or a con- Dawes, P.C.-803) 298-1601, mality and dignity as judges when de- ditional or special use permit. Rezonings tbleau@lhdlaw. com ciding quasi-judicial matters. in Colorado are quasi-judicial.1 They con- This article addresses some ofthe prac- st;itute one of the largest categories of tical aspects of advising quasi-judges. It such actions considered by local govern- About The discusses how bias, conflict of interest, ment decision-making bodies. Other prejudgment, and exparte contact prob- quasi-judicial matters include historic Author: lems should be resolved prior to the hear- preservation district permits, conditional This month's arti- ing. Also covered are situations where and special use perrnits, and variances.2 cle was written by board members engaging in those con- Quasi-judicial actions have three char- .'M;* a Gerald E. Dahl, a 4te. tacts must recuse themselves. -y, acteristics. They involve a state or local 5 partner with Gor- 3. 3.9,0 law that: ( 1) requires that notice be giv- 4 I - 13:,/4 such Kirgis LLP- Explanation of en before the action is taken; (2) requires % N (303) 376-5000, Quasi-Judicial Actions that a hearing be conducted before the 5 gdchl@ The first task ofthe local government action is taken; and (3) directs that the il gorsuch. com. attorney is to determine whether the action results from application of pre- The Colorado Lawyer / March 2004 / Vol. 33, No. 3 / 69 4*@Dbit,741:€*ti~4>Ji©:' 'f+Ki,6~j·* ·2 ·ii:'.-el ¥ f, 41•-• r~. 1~i, i' .* fw*..,·,~,4.*+.)'-g~.i.;~t*·..It..: 9......v.,.i*t//*.:352.0 -'2,2..Vill...... w ·»• ~ #•./.r ~-=#-##' Jun-15-04 10:13am From-Dunn & Causey,LLC +9707488881 T-130 P.002/003 F-829 70 Go-rnment and Administrative Law Ne..- March scribed criteria (such as criteria for rezon- In certain situations, the Standards pro- board member from acting in his or her ing found in local zoning regulations) to hibit local government officials and em- quasi-judicial capacity. They reflect the the individual facts of the case.3 ployees from accepting gifts of substantial practical reality of life in a small commu- Throughout the quasi-judicial process, value or substantial economic benefit. nity and, standing alone, should not pre- counsel must ensure that all due process This would apply if acceptance ofthe gift vent a board member from voting on an requirements are properly met, Notice re- by a reasonable person would tend to im- application, Bearing in mind that the quired by any state statute and applicable properly influence him or her to depart Standards are primarily concerned with local regulations must be given. Further, from faithful and impartial discharge of financial interest, it is important to note an adequate right to present evidence and public duties.2 Such prnhibition also would that these kinds of fact patterns lack the cross-examine witnesses must be provid- apply if a reasonable person in the same potenaal of personal financial gain or loss: ed to the applicant or landowner whose position should know under the circum- 1. The member lives next door to the interest ia the subject ofthe hearing. stances tbat the gift is primarily for the applicant. purpose of rewarding that person for offi- 2. The member and the applicant know Bias and Conflict cial action taken-10 and like (or dislike) each other, are friends, The Sta:ndards contain an exception for go to the same church, have memberships Of Interest campaign contributions, occasional non- at the same club, orplay golf togetlier. Colorado law contains a presumption pecunia·ry gifts of insignificant value, or 3. The member is related by blood or that quasi-judicial hearings are conduct- payment or reimbursement for travel ex- marriage to the applicant, but has no fi- ed impartially.4 This presumption can be penses for attendance at a convention in nancial connection or potential of experi- overcome by evidence of actual bias or which the official is participating.11 Also encing financial gain or loss. However, to conflict ofinterest that creates an appear- excluded are items of perishable or lion- the extent the blood or marriage relation- ance ofimpropriety:$ permanent value, including meals; lodg- ship is imihediate (for instance, husband At the local level, paiticularly in small ing; travel expenses; or tickets to sporting, and wife or father and son), the member communities, it is common for members of recreational, or cultural events.12 should step down- Even though there may the decision-making body to personally be no financial connection, the relation. know the applicant and opponent and, per- Personal or Private Interests ship is so close that a conflict of interest haps, have pre·edsting relationships with The «personal or private interest" key would be presumed. them- However, by itself this does not cre- phrase in the Standards was likely adapt- ate a bias, prejudgment, or confllct ofin- ed from a provision of the Colorado Con- Prejudgment terest suflicient to exclude members from stitution that is applicable to mernbers of Local government officials sometimes the decision. It is necessary to review any the General Assembly. 11 Tb the extent the are allowed or compelled to have engaged local charter, ordinance, or land use regu- local government attorney can determine in prior decision-making on a matter that lation governing conflicts of Interest. The that a board member has a personal or later comes befbre than in their quasi-ju- attorney must look to state law for guid- private interest in the subject matter of dicial capacities, A common example is ance on conflict-of-interest matters. thehearing, it rnaybe necessary to advise where members of a city council or board the member to step down- oftrustees in statutory municipalities are Standards of Conduct There are numerous examples of per- required by their municipal home-rule In 1988, the General Assembly enacted sonal or private interests that might re- charters to sit on the planning commis- a comprehensive code of ethics for both quire recusal. The board member might: sion.15 No Colorado case law states that state and local government officials, enti- (1) be involved in a zoning matter, repre- board members receiving such additional tled "Standards of Conduct" (herea/ker, sent an applicant, or attempt to represent information have been impermissibly "Standards").6 The Standards establish himself or herself at the hearing; (2) own pmjudiced by receiving information prior recommended guidelines, as well as man- or have an interest in a business that is to the public hearing. datory rules of conduct- The Standards al- making the application; (3) have financial The practice of county commissioners so prohibit public officials or employees dealings with the applicants (4) have a fi- appointing themselvestotheboard of ad- from perfbrming nandalinterest in abusiness that isa com- justment was upheld by the Colorado an official act directly [such as votingto petitor of the applicant business;14 or (5) Court ofAppeaIs in Feder u. McCurdy. 18 approve] and substantially affecting to be a creditor ofthe business that is asking However, the Fedder court was troubled its economic benefit a business or other for action. by the concept ofincompatible offices, undertaking in which he either has a It ig helpful to have an understanding In Johnson u City Council,17 the Colo- substantial financial interest or is en- of what is not a personal or private inter- rado Court of Appeals found no violation gaged as en,ingml, Tnne,111-Ant nprlregen- est. Often, opponents or proponents in a of due process where two council mem- tative, or agent.7 public hearing will accuse a board mem- bers received evidence ataninfbrmal hear- The Standards address circumstances ber ofhaving a private interest or conflict ing and expressed opinions prior topartic- where amember ofagoverning body ofa simply because he or she is acquainted ipating in the formal hearing before the local government has a "personal or pri- with the applicant. However, the Sta:n- entire council.18 In a later cage, the Court vate interest" in any matter proposed or dards focus primarily on financial rela- of Appeals considered a case involving pending befbre the governing body. Such tionships in determining whether an im- several members ofthe Public Employees board members must: (1) disclose the in- permissible personal or private interest Retirement -Association Board who ini- I,erest; (2) not vote on the mall,er; and (3) exisTS. Ually denied 611 application and later sat refrain from attempting to influence the Following are examples of relationships on the board for its final decision. The decisions ofthe adler members.9 that ordinarily would not disqualify a court found that the applicant had been 70 / The coloririn ] .u,ver / Mireh 0!804 /Val. 11 Na. 3 W .1,- 1 411-61'f 1 61 4 14/Ni r rum-vurni a ujusey,6,1.u +9(0(488881 T-130 P.003/003 8-829 1 200iGovernmentandAdministrative_91____1_____-_--- 71 improperly prqjudied by at least some of mation. This is perfectly acceptable when the evidence on which the applicant re- the matter is legislative. However, this is r=IORPORATION KITS ~ FOR 3 lied.1.9 riot permitteain quaai-judied matters, as ~ Board members must exercise extrevie it violates The due process rights of the ap- R COLORADO caution in their activities and statements plicant and opponent. Constiiuents can- ~ $55.95 outsidepublic hearings.Althoughthe ease not be expected to learn the distinction 0 Binder & upc•* lad= tab Ack pnr-4 •-tock ccrufluto law is largely fact-specific, counsel for 10- between legislative and quasi-judicial M.,full p.8. 006, & Boidthilerbwi,ejurledgcr. embe.Lng cal governments should advise public of- matters. Thus, counsel should stress the W sa.1 & peuch,10 ihe:et» of blank23% cotwn bond paper. ficial clients not to participate in any pub- following pointA to board members: ~ Barn. kit *ik By•LA,vD, misurel & rt$01Utions paota@t and G 1 Bhe,m ofbl,nk 25% Gottgo bend pip= pu t•* form, for RIN lic dialogue or discussion on a quasi-judi- Probzems Arising from Ex Parie n ..d•'R- corpormtion deoica cial mattcr priortothehearing onthe Coidaots: Engaging in expam contacts M $58.95 can invalidate the action of the body. Ex W K15-0..~,•ed S 10.00 le,i than KE,Jular pl.ze 1 Inatter 1 La Booth u Tkustees of th£ Town of SU- parte contacts can deny due proccs<3 to the W I verPZz,me,3~ a committee aftbe townboard applicant and opponents. j oftrugtees had investigated an applica. Ways to Avoid Personal Ex Parte ~ tion for a liquor license prior to the hear- Contacts: If a board member is called or 0 ing, then recommended against isguence personally contacted by the applicant. a ~ n-4-=Il ofthe license. The Colorado Supreme Court supporter, or opponent and the matter is / *-41---& found that these board ac#iong. combined identified, he or she should immediately with other facts, resulted in the applicant state that. as a bcard member, it is im- < ~'' 1 101~ being denied afair andimpartial hearing.21 proper to talk about the case outside the It is important to remember that local hearing Inom. rrhe member could explain, --'ll:--9-~ government ofScials also are policy-mak- for example, 'The city/county attorney ers who are called on to express public told me I hed to hear all testimony only in policy positions. In fhct, this actviE is one the public hearing."The board member of their most important obligationa. The should urge the person initiating such onre• meuers Colorado Supreme Court recognized this contact to bring his or her points of view role in Mountain Stares Tetephone & Uble- and testimony to the public hearing. Fi- LTD. LIA Co. Oul-m %9.96 wor,·reoFrr ou-TErr 29.95 graph u Public Uritities Commission.22 nally. the board member should stress LTD.PARTNERSHIP 559-95 FAMILY. lap. ram. $50% The Court held that a derision-maker is that by listening now, he or she might have fRAI W/POUCH S/Loo Fo*MS ON CD 0*DISK ~29.95 not disqualified on due process grounds to step down and not vote at tho hearing. STOCK CERTS Go) sa.o. simply for having tal<en a position, even Written MateriaZy: Board members 129Pplu•k &*014: =Miti.ill in public, on a poligt issue related to a dis- also should make sure any materials they puta, if there is no showing that the decl- receive outside tbe hcaring are copied and NEW! sion-makerisineapable of judging a par- sharedwith =veryoneat the time ofhear- RUBBER STAMPS ticular controversy fairly on the basis of ing. E-mail correspondence should be for- Cofpomic/llC seals. normial/notary public, 1br its own circumstances.= warded to the planning staf[ city or coun- dcposit, addzeSS. Signar=4 Ct= ty manager, and other board members Sulf·i•lang Ex Parte Contacts and distributedat the hearing. SAME DAY SERVICE Er pam contacts involve communica- Action Following Ex Parte Contact , tionsberweenaboard memberandapar- If an exparte contact occurs, The board I ASK ABOUr ty ormember of the public thattakc place nwmber should: (1) promptly inform the ... WILL & TRUST STATIONERY outside a noticed public hearing. These attorney for the body; (2) disclose the con- KEGIS-IZAED AGENCY SERVICES FOR contacts deny due process to both appli- tact to the body at the beginning of the MONTANA cants and opponenti of€he application be- hearing: and (3) describe its content ae cause the other party im not present to completely as posmble. In an eareme case, i ORDER TOLL EREE ! hemr and rebut statements made to the the boaal member may be required to step 1 PE[ONE 1-800-874-6570 decision-maker. down and not participate further. For ex- 1 ' An expake contact may not necessaily ample, if the ex perte contact WaS SO ~ FAX 1-800-874-6568 remult m invalidation ofthe ultimate deci- laIlgthy that it j3 not possible to quickly or / E.JUIL : COrplki=*cybc?nM.De sion. Nevertheless, the appearance of im- fully describelt to the other me.zobers.Ile- , appr,-25 n:ZY:MI'73£5EEP.IED SA,CD,v propriety undermines the integrity of the cusual 29 tbe only way to c=e the due Pro':- - 5400?ERNTIZ?SS<137(9912 governing body ilse]£ Thus, the local gov- ess problem. ~ Lly 523% e *'21 m.1- WZIE Ye€EK owlig Dk Ad =:d „06'15'L AZA: E be'W ernment attorney should advbe quasi-ju-- . s.:n:s:,Arlizi,v Czzu.,ezir= - dicial decision-makera to avoid ex parte Ex Parte Contacts in Site Visits M CORP-KIT NORTHWEST, Etg=.*,=ch.~.zi...u 1 contacts in quasi-judicial matters. Board members often are asked to visit 1 the site of a land use application prior m ,( INC General Guidelines /br the public hearing, Site visits are valuable 4 : 35 W. RESERVE Avoiding Fac Parte Contacts because they allow the decision-making ~ P.O. BOX MOO (59903) 8.-....1„r--bors snri constituents may body togeta physical sense ofthe proper- 1 KALISPELL, MT 59901 be accustomed to using private converse- ty involved m tEle appncauon. The= chal- Q dolls to communicate public policy infor- lenge is to prevent the body from having -Z-Z-Z-Z-Z-~*2' The Colorado Lawyer / March 2004 3 Vol, 33, No. j 1•i- 72 G rnment and Administrative Law N March impermissible ex parte contact with the body to act in this way outside the public approach is effective for the briefencounter applicant or members of the public during hearing in any context. in the grocery store, where, for example the visit. 4. The applicant or members ofthe pub- an opponent of a rezoning expresses his or It is preferable for members ofthe body lie should not be permitted to answer her opinion to the board member before : to individually visit the site on their own, "simple informational questions," such as he or she can stop the conversation and and at any time prior to the public meet- where property boundaries lie. After an- urge the opponent to attend the meeting . ing or hearing. This avoids Open Meetings swering such questions, the person is like- in person. Law notice problems.24 Such individual ly to add his or her opinion, Instead, ifthere Nevertheless, an on-the-record-dialogue 1 visits should not present a problem un- are questions ofinformation, the planning is not adequate to remedy serious exparte j less: (1) the site visit needs to take place staffshould answer them. The staff should contacts or other evidence of bias, such as 1 in an organized fashion because of site not be requested to"ask the applicant (or an applicant taking a board member to I safety or security issues, or because plan- members of the public)" questions, such lunch for a substantive discussion of the 1 1 ning staff needs to brief the board at the that the answers will be repeated to the application. Similarly, this exercise cannot i site; and (2) access to the property is an is- body This is because the body may not use cure a clear conflict of interest that would j sue. For example, board members could the staff as a "human telephone" to con- require recusal under the statute or where fi visit the property separately if it is a sin- duet what otherwise would be an exparte the totality of the circumstances indicate gle lot on a public street and can be ob- contact. that a board member cannot act impar- served from the public street or otherwise 5. Engaging in deliberation during the tially26 For example, recusal would be ap- easily accessed without the necessity of visit or taking statements from the appli- propriate where the board member is a having an applicant representative pres- cant or members of the public during the partner in the business or undertaking ent to unlock the gates. visit could invalidate the ultimate deci- that is making the application to the deci- Ideally, planning staff to the board will sion made by the body sion-making body. be able to visit the site with the applicant It may seem awkward and artificial for to learn about the layout and the key fea- board members not to deliberate or con- Disclosure and Recusal tures that are relevant to the application. verse about the application during the vis- Guidelines This would allow staff to adequately brief it and not to receive information from oth- If a quasi-judge has engaged in a seri- 11 the body outside the presence ofthe apI)li- ers who are present. Nonetheless, these ous exparte contact, or there exists a con- * cant. It is permissible to allow the appli- rules are for the benefit of those who are flict ofinterest, bias, or prejudgment, coun- 1 cant to stake building locations and other not present and, most important, for the sel will need to establish this on the record. # markers on the site prior to the visit to enforceability of the body's ultimate deci- The record should reflect the nature ofthe * make it easier for members ofthe body to sion. In an extreme case where an infrac- contact, conflict, bias, or prejudgment. In j understand what the development in- tion takes place, the site visit should be accordance with state law, a board mem- * volves. halted and all parties should be reminded ber with a conflict must not vote or attempt * Under the Colorado Open Meetings ofthese principles. to influence others.27 The local government * Law, site visits are considered open meet- attorney also should inform the decision- 1 ings if the lesser of a quorum or three Advising Board or, making board ofseveral important guide- members of the body is in attendance. 25 If lines. so, it will be necessary to publish or post Disclosure and 1. A board member's interest must be the time and place of the meeting (as for Recusal Issues disclosed at the earliest stage. any other meeting). However, notice should If grounds for recusal exist-bias, con- 2. Disclosure needs to precede discus- state that no testimony will be taken from flict of interest, prejudgment, or ex parte sion on the matter. any party. contact-the local government attorney is 3. If a board member with a possible The attorney, staff person, or chair of obligated to advise the board member conflict votes, he or she should do so only if the body should lay out five ground rules whether he or she should step down. Ifthe such participation is necessary to achieve for the site visit: conflict is minor or the board member re- a quorum or otherwise enable the body to 1. The site visit is only for the purpose fuses to step down, the attorney should, at act.28 The board member must make writ- of acquainting the members of the body a minimum, make a record at the outset ten disclosure prior to-not after-taking with the physical layout of the site. ofthe public hearing. This may be done by action. This disclosure is to be made in 3 2. The matter at issue is quasi-judicial. asking the board member to: (1) describe writing to the governing body and to the i. Therefore, the body is acting as a quasi- the contact or interest he or she had with Secretary of State.29 The statute does not judge on the applicant's proposal, and no the applicant, opponent, or other party; specify a particular format for this disclo- ' testimony or statements may be received and (2) state why he or she can render a sure. The author suggests sending a letter f by the body during the site visit from any- fair and impartial decision in the matter. that identifies the board member, body, one other than staff In other words, no This exercise has dual benefits. First, it member's interest, and application. outside persons should accompany the cures minor exparte contacts or claims of The best way to ensure that a recused body, such as the applicant, its represen- prejudgment, bias, or conflict of interest board member who has stepped down does ir * tative, or any member ofthe public. by giving all board members, applicants, not influence other members of the body i 3. It is inappropriate for the members of and opponents the same level of knowl- is to advise the board member to leave the the body to: (1) deliberate among them- edge. Second, to the extent the board mem- room. It is inappropriate for the board selves during the site visit; or (2) receive ber affirms that he or she can render an member to remain in the room and, in par- ~ : any information from the applicant or oth- impartial decision, the statement must be ticular, remain at the dais and simply not ers. It would be impermissible for the given weight by the reviewing court. This vote. It would be too tempting for the board ,' t 72 / The Colorado Lawyer / March 2004 / Vol. 33, No. 3 *er,1.4-*St;4*:N 47%*Ata##41 1,4#4**4#*f . ' '4; 2004 Cavernment and Administrative Law »ws 73 member to offer opinions "for information this reason, counsel should encourage staff 5. Stivens u INce, 71 F.3d 732 (9th Cir. 1995). if only" and otherwise exercise the influence to state in its report reasons for both rec- 6. CRS §§ 2+18-101 et seq. a board member has, but should not use, OInmended and non-recommended options. 7. CRS §§ 24-18-108(2)(d) and -109(2Xb). in the matter at hand. Finally, the entire There may be cases for which counsel 8. CRS § 24-18-109(3)Cal 9. CRS § 24-18-104(1)(b). body should be reminded that a potential expects litigation challenging the decision. 10. Id. 1 consequence offailing to act properly may In such instances, immediately after the 11. CRS § 24-18-104(3). 1 result in invalidation of the action taken decision is made, counsel should ask the 12. Id. by the entire body.3o decision-making body to adopt a further 13. Colo. Const. Art. V, § 43. motion that directs counsel to prepare 14. CRS § 24-18-105(4); see also Stivens, su- Findings and Decision written findings for its consideration and pra, note 5. action at the next meeting. 15. CRS § 31-23-203(1)(a) and (b). 4 Aaer counsel has successfully guided 16. Fedder, 768 22d 711 (Colo.App. 1989). * the quasi-judges through the minefields of Conclusion 17. Johnson, 595 P.2d 701 (ColoApp. 1979). * bias, conflict ofinterest, prejudgment, and 18. Id. at 704. ¥ ex parte contacts, the public hearing will Local government officials provide due 19. Tepley u Public Employees Retirement * be conducted. An adequate record of the process at the grass roots level. These qua- Assoc, 955 P.2d 573 (Colo.App. 1997), cert. de- t. proceedings needs to be made. There si-judges need and will appreciate help nied (May 26,1998). + should be a reliable audio recording sys- from local government attorneys in hold- 20.Booth, 474 22d 227 (Colo. 1970), 4 tem, which will identify all speakers, in- ing effective and dignified hearings. The 21. Id. at 229. board's role begins long before any hear- 22. Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph, Q cluding the applicant, planning staff; board 4 members, and public witnesses. All physi- ings. The local government attorney carl 763 P.2d 1020 (Colo. 1988). guide quasi-judges away from situations 23. Id. at 1028. 1 cal and documentary exhibits should be that would involve them in prohibited ex 24. CRS § 24-6-402(2)(b) and (c) IT numbered and preserved in a marked file. 25. CRS § 24-6-402(2Xb). parte contacts, activities, or relationships f Finally, the standard of Colorado Rules that otherwise would require them to step 27. CRS § 24-18-109(3)(a). 26. Booth, supra, note 20 at 228. of Civil Procedure ("C.R.C.P.") 106(a)(4) down. This serves the local government 28. CRS § 24-18-109(3)(b). Note that the dis- 1. must be satisfied. According to C.R.C.R client and protects the public interest closing member must comply with tile volun- 106(a)(4), competent evidence must exist through a fair and impartial decision- tary disclosure procedures of CRS § 24-18-110. in the record to support the decision ofthe making process. 29. CRS §§ 18-8-308(1), 24-18-110, and 31-4- local governing body.31 The case law is clear 40*3). that this need not be a preponderance of NOTES 30. Booth, supra, note 20. the evidence presented. Instead, the re- 31. Save Park Cty. u. BOCC, 990 P.2d 711 viewing court's role is to determine that 1. Snyder u City ofLakewood, 542 R2d 371 (Colo.App. 1998), a#'d on other grounds, 990 adequate evidence supporting the local (Colo. 1975). P.2d 35 (Colo. 1999). governing body's decision is presented.32 2. Van Huyson u. Bd. of Adjustment, 550 32. Bauer u Wheat Riage, 513 P.2d 203 (Colo, Written findings are not required where R2d 874 (Colo.App. 1976); Moschetti u. Bd. of 1973). the reviewing court can locate the support Ac<justment, 574 P.2d 874 (Colo.App. 1977). 33. Sundance Hills Homeowners Assoc. u. somewhere in the record.33 Nonetheless, 3.Baldauf u Roberts, 37 P.3d 483 (ColoApp. BOCC, 534 P.2d 1212 (Colo. 1975); Hudspeth u. 2001). BOCC, 667 P.2d 775 (Colo.App. 1983); Fire g chances ofbeing upheld are materially in- 4. Soon Yee Scott u City of Englewood, 672 House Car Wash u. Bd. of Adjustment, 30 -p,sd 3 creased when findings are adopted. If a 10- P.2d 2225 (Colo.App. 1983); Hadley u Moffat 262 (Colo.App. 2001). cal code or resolution requires written Cty. Sch. District, 681 P.2d 938 (Colo. 1984). 34. Baue,; supra, note 32. I findings, failure to comply is grounds for reversal.34 In cases that are controversial or other- 2004 10th Circuit Judicial Conference: July 21-23 in Park City, Utah wise might be subject to challenge, the Register at http://www.ca10.uscourts.gov. easiest approach is to provide written find- ings as part ofthe board's hearing packet. * These could be in the form of alternative - motions to approve or deny, "based upon the following, established in evidence pre- Achievement: Accomplishing successfully through skill& perseverance sented at the hearing," followed by a short You develop the legal strategy - we provide the medical record foundation list of items. The attorney should always Our proudest achievement - earning your confidence include an explanation "for the reasons set forth in the staffreport dated _." Many local government planning staffs . 4" Consultants provide the board with two options: (1) the A -f for Medical staff recommendation, which includes rea- ~#F |lit Direction, LLC sons for the decision; and (2) the non-rec- ommended option, which often lacks such i reasons. If the board decides against the Meg Dunlop RN and Jeannie Stenson RN staff recommendation, this approach CMD Legal Nurse Consultants 303.693.9991 leaves the defending attorney without any Visit www.uslegalnurses.com for our complimentary offer documented reasons for that decision. For , The Colorado Lawyer / March 2004 / Vol. 33, No. 3 / 73 4-~·u 'mi@20{P:,~I:#f?di'(·ftjil€ *.ir Jp#A 19=71'