PZC Packet 021511Staff Report - Final Design may'
February 15, 2011 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting -AVON
Report date February 11, 2011
Project type Minor Design and Development;
Alternative Equivalent Compliance
Legal description Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Zoning Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
Address 20 Nottingham Road
Prepared By Jared Barnes, Planner I
Summary of Request
Craig Snowden of Snowden Hopkins Architects and Dominic Mauriello of the Mauriello Planning
Group (MPG), representing Jim Pavelich of GPI, LLC, the Applicant, have submitted a Minor
Design and Development application including an Alternative Equivalent Compliance (AEC)
application for modifications to the approved Development Plan for a new commercial building on
Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek (BMBC) Subdivision, also described as 20
Nottingham Road.
The proposal includes minor modifications to the site layout as well as modifications to door and
window locations and sizes, roof pitches and materials, rooftop mechanical equipment, and rooftop
mechanical equipment screening. Attached to this report are a vicinity map (Exhibit A), letter from
Craig Snowdon dated January 17, 2011 (Exhibit B), letter from Dominic Mauriello dated January
27, 2011 (Exhibit C), Color and Material board (Exhibit D) and reduced plan sets of the proposed
modifications (Exhibit E).
Staff recommends approval of the "Minor Design and Development' and "Alternative Equivalent
Compliance" applications for Lot 67, Block 1, BMBC Subdivision for the reasons stated herein.
Previous Approval
The Development Plan for the subject property was approved by the PZC at their November 16,
2010 meeting, and pursuant to Title 17 of the Avon Municipal Code (AMC). The approval included
the following four (4) conditions:
1. PZC will review rooftop mechanical penetrations (including screening details) prior to the
issuance of a building permit;
2. If for any reason the Applicant is unable to obtain enough stone from the existing building
and the stone type changes, the revised stone must come back to the PZC for review and
approval;
3. An appropriately scaled on-site mockup, showing all materials and finishes, must be
approved by the PZC for final approval of materials and colors; and,
4. The Applicant will work with staff to address and reduce the bear attracting plant species
identified on the landscape plan.
Property Description
The subject property is 0.528 acres or 22,999 sq ft, and zoned Neighborhood Commercial. The
vicinity map is attached as Exhibit A. The Property shares a common access point with Lot 68,
which is occupied by a gas station, convenience store and second story apartments.
Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning
North: Swift Gulch Road — R.O.W.
South: Gas Station/Convenience Sore — Zoned Neighborhood Commerical (NC)
East: Gas Station/Convenience Store/Commercial Office, Zoned Neighborhood Commerical (NC)
West Town of Avon Public ROW and Buck Creek PUD Lot 4 (Future Fire Station)
Planning Analysis
The proposed modifications to the building and architecture do not affect the proposed uses, site
access, height, landscaping, or setbacks that were approved with the Final Design. The site layout
is being modified with minor adjustments to the parking area and sidewalk along Nottingham Road.
The proposed site modifications are also compliant with all applicable zoning and engineering
standards.
Site Modification — Administrative Review and Approval
The Engineering and Planning Departments have reviewed the proposed site modifications to the
parking area and sidewalk, and the Director will approve these modifications as Administrative
Amendments to the Final Design pursuant to Section 7.16020(g), Minor Amendment.
Design Modifications - PZC Review Considerations
As outlined in Exhibit B, the proposed building modifications are limited to the architecture, and the
materials and colors of the approved building.
The Applicant also addresses conditions one (1) and three (3) of the Final Design approval as
outlined above. With respect to condition one (1), the Applicant has proposed screening the
rooftop mechanical equipment with a four-sided enclosure, as exhibited on Sheets A2.2, A3.0, and
A3.1. The proposed enclosure is approximately forty-two (42) inches above the western roofline
and will be finished with "corten", which is a weathered metal designed to create a rust -like
appearance when exposed to the weather over time. Also proposed is a chimney on the upper
roof section, which will serve as a mechanical chase.
To address condition three (3), the Applicant has submitted a color and material board (Exhibit D)
to supplant the requirement for an on-site mockup. The colors and materials have not changed
since the Final Design approval.
The AEC application is required because the proposed modifications to the roof include reducing
some of the roof pitches from four -to -twelve (4:12) to two -to -twelve (2:12). As stated in
§7.28.0900)(4)(ix)(B) of the Development Code, "All primary roofs and secondary shed roofs shall
have pitches of no less than four -to -twelve (4:12)." The Applicant believes that the lower roof pitch
improves the overall architecture of the building and reduces the perceived bulk and mass of the
building. Therefore, the proposed design should be approved as an equivalent alternative to the
4:12 roof pitch requirement. The Applicant's AEC statement is included as Exhibit C.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposed "Minor Design and
Development" and "Alternative Equivalent Compliance" applications for Lot 67, Block 1, BMBC,
with the conditions and findings listed in the motion below.
Recommended Motion
"I move to approve the proposed `Minor Design and Development' and `Alternative Equivalent
Compliance' applications for Lot 67, Block 1, BMBC, with the following conditions:
Conditions 1 and 3 of the Final Design approval have been addressed with the approved
building modifications and submitted color and material board;
and findings:
1. that the application adheres to the applicable Review Criteria for a Minor Development Plan
as listed in §7.16.080(0;
2. that the application adheres to the applicable Review Criteria for a Design Review as listed
in §7.16.090(1); and
3. that the application adheres to the applicable Review Criteria for an Alternative Equivalent
Compliance as listed in §7.16.120(d)."
Exhibits
A: Vicinity Map
B: Letter of correspondence from Craig Snowdon dated January 17, 2011
C: Letter of correspondence from Dominic Mauriello dated January 27, 2011
D: Color and Material Representation Board
E: Reduced Plan Sets
,� - 9. ;,�
� '"
�, .�
• � j
� , I Nt
�.\
'IY f 1 .
r: '.d hJ.
�- 2 r
N �
1 �i
♦�
y
S
• d ' ;
` ate' SES '� - �' � ^;F i .. �� i
v
�� .k22 �itSy_..nY1" Y,Y 1-1 �4 - � ! l�1� j
v�f i Y k n iY ♦:
{'
4 ^�
\yi,
<1 ,� �
e Y ��
_ �. Fey �j�' � �.
k
�� _ y' ,.r ,� ,
' .,
n:
�. �\�.
k. .. r � �
c.
y \ M �{ �
R' . 3Y PA 1',
�.� � �_
_t ,,
��. <<
�\ \ J 'F
\ �>�
�� �� \ \� 1 \ �.. �` 'P VIS
� _
� ��' � i
\. A 1� - � -- -- "�
_� �� �
'� r
�� _ �� . c:
'��
- � A �'�.
� A'. '� � .��i� _
Exhibit B
Matt Gennett, AICP
Planning Manager — Town of Avon
P.O.Box 975/400 Benchmark Road
Avon, Colorado 81620
January 17, 2011
RE: 20 Nottingham Road / Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek.
Matt,
Since our PZC approval on 11/16/10, our office has been progressing with permit
drawing preparation. We are hoping to submit the drawings to the TOA Building
Department within the next 7-10 days. In the process of updating the design drawings, we
have incorporated several changes to the site and building, which we feel enhance the
project. As this submittal was reviewed under your Title 17 rules and regulations, I was
not sure how the review of these changes needed to be handled. I am sending you a
summary of the changes for your review and comment, and hopefully approval to allow
us to continue moving forward.
SITE PLAN CHANGES:
1.Shifted and added parking space along north(increased parking from 28 to 29).
2.Revised HC parking drop off from 5' to 8' (per code) and shifted HC parking.
3.Eliminated walkway/steps between HC parking and east parking row, and
replaced it with raised planter/landscape element (5'x20'). Shifted HC ramp.
4.Aligned south edge of east parking with gas station landscape island(3'+/- shift)
to increase island planter size (item 3).
5.Provided new sidewalk sections (removed existing asphalt section) along
Nottingham Road to improve loading area and drive entrance.
6.Revised western service sidewalk to eliminate steps and tie into new walk.
7.Revised eastern sidewalk to eliminate steps and tie into new walk.
8.Added "keystone block facing to existing stone wall (per TOA PZC).
9.Added 25-30' high flagpole at the southeast landscape area.
l O.Note — All changes maintained TOA landscape requirements.
BUILDING PLANS/ELEVATIONS:
1.Relocated proposed coffee shop entry door to the north end of the east wall and
revised the east wall window placements.
2.Changed cast covered walkway roof section (eastern 7') to a 2/12 slope (in lieu
of a continuous 4/12 main roof), and changed the roofing material from asphalt
shingles (main roof material) to corrugated "corten" roofing panels.
3.Extended the restaurant entry dormer wall face out to align with the timber
columns and beams (eliminated timber truss), and relocated restaurant sign and
lighting to new wall face.
4.Added a mechanical flue chimney (30"x72"+/-) in the northwestern portion of
upper roof section west of the main roof ridge (3'+/-) in a wood sided enclosure.
5.Coordinated anticipated kitchen roof (low) mechanical equipment placement,
and proposed screening with vertical 42" high metal "corten" panels. All other
anticipated mechanical equipment will be placed within the building and the
fenced service yards per TOA PZC request.
6.Added anodized bronze gutter and downspout sections to the roof plan.
7.Relocated electrical service/disconnect on the west elevation.
8.Enlarged window 11.
I hope this gives you enough information to review and comment on the changes being
proposed. If you or other members of the TOA Planning Department need drawings to
review this request, please let me know and I can forward our latest drawings.
Sincerely,
Craig N. Snowdon AIA
Snowdon and Hopkins — Architects, P.C.
Exhibit C
VM
Mauriello Planning Group
January 27, 2011
Planning and Zoning Commission
c/o Jared Barnes
Town of Avon
PO Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Re: Alternative Equivalent Compliance (AEC) — 20 Nottingham Road
Dear Commissioners:
This letter is a request for AEC approval for a secondary roof form on this previously
approved project located at the former Pizza Hut property. As shown in the proposed
materials, the roof form on the east elevation of the building is proposed to be changed by
adding a new lower roof form that acts as a cover for the walkway at the store front of this
proposed building. The intent of this new roof form is to reduce the apparent bulk and mass
of the previous design and roof and provide better visibility to the storefront by consumers.
The proposed pitch of the roof is a 2 in 12 whereas the design standards require a minimum 4
in 12 pitch for any type of roof form.
We believe the proposed secondary roof form is more appropriate and sympathetic to the
overall design of the building and improves the aesthetic and functional qualities of the
building. The reduced pitch will allow more visibility to the storefronts, which is valuable to
the success of the future businesses to be located within this structure and improved
revenues to the Town.
The proposed change in roof pitch and the alternative offered will:
1. Achieve the intent of the subject design standard to the same or better degree than
the subject standard by providing exceptional architectural quality to the building and
reducing its perceived bulk and mass;
2. Achieve the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better
degree than the subject standard by improving the architecture of the building and
reducing its perceived bulk and mass;
3. Result in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than the subject
standard by improving the ability of customers to view storefronts and by reducing
the apparent bulk and mass of the building;
4. Impose no greater impact on adjacent properties that would occur through
compliance with the specific requirements of the design standard.
We hope that you will agree with our analysis and conclusions and look forward to our
hearing on February 15, 2011.
Sincerely,
Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP
Principal
i
PZC WORKSHOP 2—AVON DEVELOPMENT CODE
Topics: Development Review Procedures, Zone Districts and Use Regulations.
Meeting Date: FEBRUARY 1, 2011
A. CHAPTER 7.16 - DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES
1. REVIEW AUTHORITY (Table 7.16-1)
Applications Requiring PZC Approval
• Development and Design Review (formally Sketch/Final).
• Alternative Equivalent Compliance
• Special Review Uses
• Variance
• Location and Extent
• 1041 Regulations
Applications Requiring PZC Recommendation and TC
Approval
• Rezoning
• PUD
• Code Text Amendments
• Comprehensive Plan Amendments
• Major Development Plans in Town Core
• Major and Minor Subdivisions
• Annexation
• Right of Way Vacation
• Vested Property Rights
• Administrative Reviews
• Administrative Subdivisions
• Minor Development Plans
• Minor Amendments
2. GENERAL PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS
a. Pre -Application Requirements
o Required conference with staff before submittal
b. Application Submittal
o Required studies and reports
o Concurrent reviews permitted
o Fees
c. Application Processing
Green Highlights
New Applications and
Review Process
Processes
New Standardized
Processes & Timelines
o Determination of Completeness — 10 days from
submittal
o Referral to Other Agencies - 14 days or 21 days
o Staff Review and Report to PZC or TC
o Required Processing — application may be withdrawn by Director if Applicant fails
respond to staff comments for period of 4 months.
d. Noticing Requirements
o Consistent requirements for publishing, mailing and posting
e. Public Hearing Procedures and Requirements
o Applications must be scheduled for public hearing wlin 75 days of determination
completeness. May be continued for 35 days or up to 95 days with Applicant consent.
to
of
f. Review and Decision
o Review Criteria
o Authority to Require Additional Studies
o Written findings required
o Conditions of Approval may be required
g. Appeal Process
B. CHAPTER 7.20 - ZONE DISTRICTS & OFFICIAL ZONING MAP
1. ZONE DISTRICTS AND DISTRICT REGULATIONS
• Remove density requirements in commercial zones
• More density requires more water rights
• Decreased setback requirements
• Added Employee Housing Mitigation for development exceeding max lot coverage
2. RETIRED DISTRICTS
• Remain on properties currently zoned R -HC and SC.
• Other properties cannot be rezoned to those districts.
3. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE (PUDs)
• Underlying zone district controls uses and dimensional requirements
• Eligible for projects with unique situation, confers substantial benefit to Town and/or incorporates
creative site design.
• Required for approval of Vested Property Rights
C. CHAPTER 7.24 - USE REGULATIONS
1. PERMITTED USES
• More mix of uses
• Out -dated uses deleted
2. SPECIAL REVIEW USES
3. TEMPORARY USES
Development Code Workshop 2 Page 2