TC Council Packet 11-13-2001Town Council Meetings
Roll Call Check Sheet
T-)atP • 11/1'1/Al
Michael Brown /
v
Debbie Buckley / ?-
Peter Buckley
Rick Cuny
Mac McDevitt
Buz Reynolds
Judy Yoder
Kam' 4\tQ o
d
v
Roll calls are called at start of meeting and for Ordinances. Do not call Mayor except for
meeting roll call or to break a tie vote.
Seating arrangements from west to east: P. Buckley, Cuny, Reynolds, Yoder, McDevitt,
D. Buckley, Brown
Staff Present:
_ /Bill Efting
Larry Brooks
Burt Levin
Kris Nash
Jacquie Halburnt
Scott Wright
Jeff Layman
Norm Wood
Meryl Jacobs
Bob Reed
Harry Taylor
Ruth Borne
Other Staff
STATE OF COLORADO )
COUNTY OF EAGLE ) SS
TOWN OF AVON )
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A WORK SESSION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, WILL BE HELD NOVEMBER 13, 2001,
AT 3:45 PM IN THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 400 BENCHMARK ROAD, AVON,
COLORADO FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING AND CONSIDERING THE
FOLLOWING:
3:45 PM - 4:45 PM 1.) Personnel Matters (Executive Session)
4:45 PM - 5:00 PM 2.) Manager's Update
5:00 PM - 5:15 PM 3.) Staff Updates
Consent Agenda Questions
Council Committee Updates
0 AND SUCH OTHER BUSINESS AS MAY COME BEFORE THE COUNCIL
THIS MEETING IS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
BY:
Ib?ten Nash
Town Clerk
POSTED AT THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THE TOWN OF AVON
ON NOVEMBER 9,2001:
AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING IN THE MAIN LOBBY
ALPINE BANK
AVON RECREATION CENTER
CITY MARKET IN THE MAIN LOBBY
11
MINUTES OF THE LOCAL LIQUOR LICENSING AUTHORITY MEETING
HELD OCTOBER 23, 2001
The Avon Town Council acting as the Local Liquor Licensing Authority for the Town of
Avon, Colorado, convened at 5:22 PM in the Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road,
Avon, Colorado. Boardmembers of the Authority present were Chairwoman Judy Yoder,
Debbie Buckley, Peter Buckley, Mac McDevitt and Buz Reynolds. Boardmembers
Michael Brown and Rick Cuny were absent. Also present were Town Manager Bill
Efting, Town Attorney Burt Levin, Assistant Town Manager Larry Brooks, Town Clerk
Kris Nash, Human Resources Director Jacquie Halburnt, Police Chief Jeff Layman,
Town Engineer Norm Wood, Recreation Director Meryl Jacobs, Public Works Director
Bob Reed, Director of Comm. Dev. Ruth Borne, Police Detective Mike Leake as well as
members of the press and public.
Application for Renewal Beer & Wine Liquor License for Camp Cafe, Inc.
There was no one present to represent the applicant.
Town Clerk Nash stated everything is in order.
Town Attorney Levin stated everything is in order.
0 Detective Leake stated that the Police Department has no concerns.
Boardmember Debbie Buckley motioned approval of the application for renewal Beer &
Wine Liquor License for Camp Cafe, Inc. Boardmember Peter Buckley seconded the
motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Approval of the Local Liquor License Authority Minutes
Boardmember McDevitt motioned approval of the October 9, 2001 meeting minutes.
Boardmember Debbie Buckley seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business to come before the Board, Boardmember Reynolds
motioned to adjourn the meeting. Boardmember McDevitt seconded the motion. The
motion carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 5:25 PM.
Y SUBMITTED:
Kristen Nash
Secretary for the Local
Liquor Licensing Authority
APPROVED:
Michael Brown
Debbie Buckley
Peter Buckley
Rick Cuny
Mac McDevitt
Buz Reynolds
Judy Yoder
u
E
TOWN OF AVON
® REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
November 13, 2001 - 5:30 PM
LS-
? ?r
a.)
E
/0 1/
1. Call to Order / Roll Call _?', -? 0
2. Citizen Input
3. Ordinances
` b.
r
4.
ti
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-16, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Approving the
First Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Annexation and Development Agreement
(the "Agreement") Between the Town of Avon (the "Town") and Traer Creek LLC, A
Colorado Limited Liability Company, EMD Limited Liability Company, A Colorado
Limited Liability Company (Collectively the "Owner"), and Traer Creek Metropolitan
District, a Quasi-Municipal Corporation and Political Subdivision of the State of
Colorado (the "District") Concerning the Development Rights and Responsibilities of the
Town and the Owner with Respect to the Village at Avon; Authorizing and Instructing
the Mayor of the Town to Sign the Amendment on Behalf of the Town, and Approving a
Site Specific Development Plan Establishing a Vested Property Right Pursuant to Article
68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as Amended (NowwadO+CtCfd) Public Hearing
L,cy-?_,
First Reading of Ordinance No. 01-1 , Series of 2001, An Ordinance Approving an
Amendment of the Wildridge Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Lot 12, Block 4,
Wildridge Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (Ruth Borne)
Resolutions
a.) Resolution No. 01-33, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving Final Plat and
Subdivision Improvements Agreement for the Village (at Avon) Filing 1, Town of Avon,
Eagle County, Colorado (tLqaseW@Vd)
b.)
r
Resolution No. 01-34, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving Preliminary Subdivision
Plan for the Village (at Avon) Filing 2, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (-
AVr01!ff Public Hearing
Resolution No. 01-36, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving the Town of Avon
Residential, Commercial and Industrial Design Guidelines - Procedures, Rules and
Regulations
5. Unfinished Business
6. New Business
is 7. Town Manager Report
8. Town Attorney Report
9. Mayor Report is
10. Other Business
11. Consent Agenda
a.) Approval of the October 23, 2001 Council Meeting Minutes
b.) Resolution No. 01-35, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving the Final Plat, a
Resubdivision of Lot 51, Block 1, Wildridge, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
2 c.) Contract for Metcalf Storm Drainage
12. Adjournment
E
• Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Bill Efting, Town Manager
Norm Wood, Town Engineeri??
From: Ruth Borne, Director of Community Development
Date November 8, 2001
Re: Second Reading of Ordinance 01-16 Approving the First Amendment
to the Annexation and Development Agreement between Traer Creek
LLC (`Traer), EMD Limited Liability Company ("EMD"), Traer Creek
Metropolitan District and the Town of Avon (PUBLIC HEARING)
Summary: The original Annexation and Development Agreement ("Original
Agreement") dated October 13, 1998 was approved contemporaneously with the
Annexation, Final Plat and PUD Development Plan for the Village at Avon.
The First Amendment to Annexation and Development Agreement ("First
® Amendment") for the Village at Avon reflects the legal, fiscal and ownership issues
associated with the revisions to the Preliminary Plan for Filing 1 and Administrative
Amendment No.1 to the PUD. These development scenarios are more definitively
described in the Memo dated October 4, 2001 which is attached hereto for your
review.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Town Council approve Ordinance 01-16,
Approving the First Amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreement
between Traer Creek LLC ("Traer), EMD Limited Liability Company ("EMD"), Traer Creek
Metropolitan District and the Town of Avon.
Alternatives
1. Approve
2. Approve with conditions
3. Table
4. Deny the Ordinance 01-16
Proposed Motion: "I move to approve on second reading Ordinance 01-16, Approving
the First Amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreement between Traer
Creek LLC (`Traer), EMD Limited Liability Company ("EMD"), Traer Creek Metropolitan
District and the Town of Avon.
Town Manager Comments
Attachment: Ordinance 01-
Exhibit "A" - First Amendment to Annexation and Development
Agreement
Memo to Council dated October 4, 2001
•
n
I:\Engineering\Avon Village\A9reen&nts\0rd Amend Annex Dev Agttnt-Memo-3.Doc• Page 2
STATE OF COLORADO )
COUNTY OF EAGLE ) SS
TOWN OF AVON )
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE TOWN COUNCIL
OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO AT 5:30 P.M. ON THE 13th DAY OF NOVEMBER
2001, AT THE TOWN OF AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CONSIDERING THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 01-16, SERIES OF 2001:
An Ordinance Approving the First Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Annexation and
Development Agreement (the "Agreement") Between the Town of Avon (the "Town") and Traer
Creek LLC, A Colorado Limited Liability Company, EMD Limited Liability Company, A
Colorado Limited Liability Company (Collectively the "Owner"), and Traer Creek Metropolitan
District, a Quasi-Municipal Corporation and Political Subdivision of the State of Colorado (the
"District") Concerning the Development Rights and Responsibilities of the Town and the Owner
with Respect to the Village at Avon; Authorizing and Instructing the Mayor of the Town to Sign
the Amendment on Behalf of the Town, and Approving a Site Specific Development Plan
Establishing a Vested Property Right Pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as Amended
A copy of said Ordinance is attached hereto, and is also on file at the office of the Town Clerk,
and may be inspected during regular business hours.
Following this hearing, the Council may consider fmal passage of this Ordinance.
This notice is given and posted by order of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado
Dated this 24th day of October, 2001.
TOWN/OF AVON, COLORADO
BY:
ash
Clerk
POSTED AT THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC PLACES WITHIN THE TOWN OF AVON ON
OCTOBER 24, 2001:
AVON MUNICIPAL BUILDING IN THE MAIN LOBBY
ALPINE BANK
AVON RECREATION CENTER
CITY MARKET IN THE MAIN LOBBY
TOWN OF AVON
ORDINANCE NO. 01- 16
SERIES OF 2001
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT (THE
"AMENDMENT") TO THE ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT (THE "AGREEMENT") BETWEEN THE TOWN OF AVON
(THE "TOWN") AND TRAER CREEK LLC, A COLORADO LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY, EMD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, A
COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY (COLLECTIVELY THE
"OWNER"), AND TRAER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, A QUASI-
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND POLITICAL SUBDIVSION OF THE
STATE OF COLORADO (THE "DISTRICT") CONCERNING THE
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE TOWN AND
THE OWNER WITH RESPECT TO THE VILLAGE AT AVON;
AUTHORIZING AND INSTRUCTING THE MAYOR OF THE TOWN TO SIGN
THE AMENDMENT ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN, AND APPROVING A SITE
SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN ESTABLISHING A VESTED PROPERTY
RIGHT PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 68 OF TITLE 24, C.R.S., AS AMENDED.
C,
WHEREAS, the Town and the Owner have negotiated the terms and conditions
of the First Amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreement
("Amendment"), which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, as used herein the term "Property" means those lands annexed into
the Town by, and described in, Ordinance No. 98-15; and
WHEREAS, the Town gave proper and timely posted notice of the dates and
times of the meetings at which the Town Council considered the Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the proposed full text of this Ordinance was duly published by
posting in the office of the Town Clerk and in three (3) additional public places within
the Town, and said publication also set forth the date and time of the public hearing at
which the Town Council considered the Amendment; and
WHEREAS, Town of Avon Ordinance Number 98-16 establishes the zoning for
the Property pursuant to the terms of a Planned Unit Development (the "PUD"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Avon Municipal Code Section 17.14.100, the Town
Council has agreed to designate the Amendment together with the Preliminary
Subdivision Plan for the Property (see Town of Avon Resolution Number 01-09) and
Administrative Amendment No. 1 to the PUD as the site specific development plan for
the Property; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Town Council that approval of said site
specific development plan establish vested property rights pursuant to Article 68 of Title
24, C.R.S., as amended; and
WHEREAS, approval of the Amendment is in the best interests of the public
health, safety and general welfare of the people of the Town; and
WHEREAS, the Town Council held a public hearing concerning the
Amendment, and by this Ordinance sets forth its findings and conclusions.
THE TOWN COUNCIL MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The Amendment complies with all applicable laws and regulations of the
State of Colorado and the Town, including, without limitation, Article 68
of Title 24, C.R.S.
2. All notices required for the public hearing at which the Town Council
considered the Amendment were properly and timely published, posted or
mailed in accordance with all applicable laws and regulations of the State
of Colorado and the Town.
3. The public hearing held on the Amendment was conducted in accordance
with all applicable laws and regulations of the State of Colorado and the
Town.
4. The Town has authority to enter into the Amendment pursuant to Sections
24-68-104(2) and 31-15-101, C.R.S., and pursuant to Section 17.14. 100 of
the Avon Municipal Code.
5. The Town's approval of and entering into the Amendment is in the best
interests of the public health, safety and general welfare of the people of
the Town.
C
2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, 0
A. The Amendment together with the Preliminary Subdivision Plan
for the Property (see Town of Avon Resolution Number 01-09)
and Administrative Amendment No. 1 for the PUD establishes a
site specific development plan for the Property and vested property
rights pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended.
B. The Amendment is hereby approved, and the Town shall enter into
it and perform its obligations.
C. The Mayor of the Town is hereby directed to sign the Amendment
on behalf of the Town.
D. Within fourteen (14) days after passage on Second Reading of this
Ordinance, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to:
1. Publish the full text of this Ordinance in a newspaper of
general circulation within the Town; and
2. Concurrently with the publication required in Section D.1.
above, publish a notice advising the general public that
approval of the Amendment pursuant to this Ordinance,
together with separate approval of the Preliminary
Subdivision Plan for the Property, and of Administrative
Amendment No. 1 for the PUD, constitutes approval of a
site specific development plan establishing a vested
property right in accordance with the terms and conditions
of the Amendment and pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24,
C.R.S., as amended.
The effective date of this Ordinance shall be seven (7) days after publication of the notice
described in Section D.1. above.
INTRODUCED, PASSED ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED this 23rd day of October, 2001 and a public hearing on this ordinance
shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado,
on the 13th day of November 2001, at 5:30 p.m. in the Avon Municipal Complex, 400
Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado.
C
3
.7
Town of Avon, Colorado
Town Council
_ 4 _
19Y Yode M r
INTRODUCED, PASSED ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND
ORDERED POSTED, this 13th day of November, 2001.
Town of Avon, Colorado
Town Council
•
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
C7
4
• Exhibit A 0
FIRST AMENDMENT
TO ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This FIRST AMENDMENT TO ANNEXATION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT (this "First Amendment") is made as of , 2001, by and
between TRAER CREEK LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Traer"), EMD LIMITED
LIABILITY COMPANY, a Colorado limited liability company ("BMD"), TRAER CREEK
METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the
State of Colorado (the "District"), and the TOWN OF AVON, a municipal corporation of the
State of Colorado (the "Town").
RECITALS
A. The Town previously executed that certain Annexation and Development
Agreement dated as of October 13, 1998, and recorded in the Eagle County, Colorado, real
property records at Reception No. 677743 on November 25, 1998 (the "Original Agreement").
The Original Agreement pertains to certain real property generally known as The Village (at
Avon) and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached to the Original Agreement (the
"Property). The Property was then owned by EMD, PVRT NOTT I LLC, PVRT NOTT II LLC
and PVRT NOTT III LLC (the "Original Parties"), each of which was a signatory of the Original
Agreement and which, collectively, constituted the "Owner" as that term was used in the
Original Agreement. Subsequently, the other entities comprising the original "Owner" were
merged into EMD, which became the sole "Owner" as that term is used in the Original
Agreement. 0
B. Pursuant to Section 1.4 of the Original Agreement, ENO has specifically granted
to Traer, in writing, the right to amend the Original Agreement as to all of the Property except
Planning Area M, with respect to which ENO retains the right to amend the Original Agreement.
C. The District has been formed in order to finance and construct certain
infrastructure improvements and to perform certain other obligations of the Owner under the
Original Agreement. Pursuant to Sections 4.4 and 6.9 of the Original Agreement, the District
wishes to execute and be a party to this First Amendment in order to assume in writing certain
obligations of the Owner under the Original Agreement.
D. The Town, Traer, EMD and the District desire to modify certain terms and
conditions of the Original Agreement as set forth in this First Amendment.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants
and agreements of the Town, Traer, EMD and the District, as more particularly set forth herein,
and in consideration of other good and valuable consideration the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the Town, Traer, EMD and the District covenant and agree as
follows: 0
492674.12 MLAYER 10/4/018:04 AM
•
0
1. Defined Terms. Unless otherwise defined in this First Amendment, capitalized
terms used herein shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Original Agreement.
2. Amendments. The Original Agreement is hereby modified as follows:
(a) Section 1.1.10 is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
District: The Traer Creek Metropolitan District, a quasi-municipal
corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado, which is one of the Special
Districts referred to in Section 4.4. All references to the term "Districts," or to the phrase
"one or more of the Districts," shall be construed as a reference to the Traer Creek
Metropolitan District.
(b) A new Section 1.1.14(a) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
EMD: EMD Limited Liability Company, a Colorado limited liability
company.
(c) Section 1. 1.26 is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
Owner: Collectively, EMD, Traer and their respective successors and
assigns. With respect to those obligations of Owner which the District has expressly
undertaken and assumed pursuant to Sections 4.4 and 6.9, references to the term "Owner"
shall be construed to be references to the District only, and not as references to EMD
and/or Traer.
(d) A new Section 1.1.26(a) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
Phase 1 Improvements: As defined in Section 4.3(b)(i).
(e) A new Section 1.1.26(b) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
Phase 2 Improvements: As defined in Section 4.3(b)(ii).
(f) A new Section 1.1.26(c) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
Phase 3 Improvements: As defined in Section 4.3(b)(iii).
(g) A new Section 1.1.26(d) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
Phase 4 Improvements: As defined in Section 4.3(b)(iv).
(h) Section 1.1.32 is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
Public Improvement Companies: As defined in Section 4.4.
11
492674.12 ML.AYn 10/"18:04 AM 2
• •
(i) A new Section 1.1.34(a) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
PUD Development Plan Administrative Amendment No. 1: As approved
by the Town on June _, 2001, the development plan for the Project which amends in its
entirety the Sketch/PUD Development Plan.
0) Section 1. 1.43 is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
Sketch/PUD Development Plan: The Village (at Avon) PUD
Development/Sketch Plan for the Project, prepared by Peter Jamar Associates, Inc., and
submitted to the Town on July 10, 1998, as approved by the Town and as amended in its
entirety by the PUD Development Plan Administrative Amendment No. 1 and any
approved future amendments thereto. Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, all
references to the term "Sketch/PUD Development Plan" shall be construed as a reference
to the PUD Development Plan Administrative Amendment No. 1 and any approved
future amendments thereto.
(k) A new Section 1.1.43(a) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
Special Districts: Traer Creek Metropolitan District and The Village
Metropolitan District.
(1) Anew Section 1.1.48(a) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
Traer: Traer Creek LLC, a Colorado limited liability company.
(m) Section 4.2 is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
4.2 1-70 Improvements and Development Limitations. The District
shall diligently pursue obtaining the necessary permits to facilitate the establishment and
construction of the Interstate 70 Improvements, consisting of (i) a full diamond
interchange on Interstate 70 (the "Interstate 70 Interchange") serving the proposed road
that will cross Interstate 70, as such road is depicted in the PUD Development Plan
Administrative Amendment No. 1, and (ii) a road designed, in accordance with the road
standards set forth in Section 1.5 of the PUD Guide, to connect the Interstate 70
Interchange to Highway 6 as depicted in the PUD Development Plan Administrative
Amendment No. 1 (the "Highway 6 Connector Road"), which Highway 6 Connector
Road shall include, subject to obtaining all required permits and approvals, a roundabout
at the intersection of Highway 6 and such Highway 6 Connector Road. The Town will
cooperate (without any obligation to incur any out-of-pocket expenses to third parties
that are not reimbursed by the District) with the District to cause completion of
construction of the Interstate 70 Improvements by a target date of June 15, 2003 (the
"Interstate 70 Completion Date"). At or prior to the time that CDOT so requires, the
District shall provide to CDOT security in the form of a completion bond or in such
other form acceptable to CDOT to ensure that adequate funds are available for
completion of the Interstate 70 Interchange. The District shall deliver to the Town
quarterly reports of the status of the permitting process. Development within the
492674.12 N4.AYER 10/4l01 8:04 AM 3
0 •
® Property prior to completion of the Interstate 70 Improvements shall be subject to the
following provisions:
(a) Prior to the District completing construction of the
interstate 70 Improvements, Owner shall be entitled to apply for and receive from the
Town building permits and certificates of occupancy for forty percent (40%) of the
Dwelling Units permitted under the Development Plan and three hundred fifteen
thousand (315,000) square feet of Commercial Space. If the Interstate 70 Improvements
are not completed by the Interstate 70 Completion Date, then the Town shall have no
obligation to issue building permits for development in excess of the foregoing numbers
after the Interstate 70 Completion Date until the Interstate 70 Improvements have been
completed. However, if the Town issues a building permit which, upon completion of
construction, will result in more than two hundred sixty thousand (260,000) square feet
of constructed Commercial Space, cumulatively, within the Property, then the District
shall have commenced construction of the Interstate 70 Interchange prior to the Town
being obligated to issue any certificate of occupancy which will result in the occupancy
of more than two hundred sixty thousand (260,000) square feet of constructed
Commercial Space, cumulatively, within the Property.
(b) Except as described in subparagraph (a) of this Section 4.2,
the Town shall have no obligation to issue building permits or certificates of occupancy
for Dwelling Units or Commercial Space until construction of the Interstate 70
Improvements is completed. If (A) construction of any Dwelling Units or Commercial
Space other than that described in subparagraph (a) of this Section 4.2 has been
commenced but has not been completed on the Interstate 70 Completion Date, and
(B) the Interstate 70 Improvements have not been completed by such Interstate 70
Completion Date, then, upon receiving written notice from the Town, the Owner shall
cease construction of such Dwelling Units or Commercial Space, as the case may be.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon written request of Owner, the Town may consent
to issue building permits in excess of the restrictions set forth above and permit
construction on projects in progress to continue to completion, and issue certificates of
occupancy, past the Interstate 70 Completion Date, which consent shall not be
unreasonably withheld or delayed.
(n) Section 4.3(b) is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
(b) Subject to timely obtaining the necessary rights-of-way and
permits, the District shall cause East Beaver Creek Boulevard to be connected to the
western boundary of the Property and extended through the Property to the Highway 6
Connector Road (the "East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements"). The Town will
timely obtain and make available to the District all property and rights-of-way required
for the East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements and the out-of-pocket costs incurred
by the Town in purchasing or otherwise obtaining such property and rights-of-way shall
be reimbursed by the District. Construction of the East Beaver Creek Boulevard
Improvements shall occur in phases, as set forth below:
E
492674.12 MLAYU 1014/01 8:04 AM 4
0
(i) Phase 1 of the East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements
(the "Phase 1 Improvements") shall consist of the construction of a
temporary, non-public extension of an all-weather surface (dust free)
service road (portions of the paved surface of the abandoned airport
runway may be used) from the western boundary of the Property to the
Highway 6 Connector Road. Such extension shall be used for
construction traffic only, which construction traffic on the non-public
service road shall not be subject to the Town's ordinances pertaining to
vehicular weight restrictions. Construction traffic shall be subject to the
Town's ordinances pertaining to vehicular weight restrictions upon
issuance of the first certificate of occupancy (temporary or final) issued
for an improvement within Planning Areas K or L. Subject to the Town's
timely issuance of the requisite permits, the District shall employ
commercially reasonable efforts to cause completion of the Phase 1
Improvements prior to commencement of any vertical construction within
Planning Area K or Planning Area L.
(ii) Phase 2 of the East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements
(the "Phase 2 Improvements") shall consist of (A) converting the Phase 1
Improvements to a two (2) lane paved temporary surface, and (B) a
two (2) lane paved temporary surface connecting Chapel Place to the
Phase 1 Improvements. Subject to the Town's timely issuance of the
requisite permits, the District shall complete the Phase 2 Improvements by
not later than the date on which the Town issues the first certificate of
occupancy for Commercial Space within Planning Area K or Planning
Area L.
(iii) Phase 3 of the East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements
(the "Phase 3 Improvements") shall consist of the following improvements
to the segment of East Beaver Creek Boulevard between the western
terminus of Beaver Creek Place and the western boundary of The Village
(at Avon): (A) construction of a two-lane roadway with a third auxiliary
lane at intersections and access points; (B) streetscape improvements to
the segment between the western terminus and the eastern terminus of
Beaver Creek Place, which improvements shall be in general conformance
with the East Beaver Creek Boulevard Streetscape Improvement Plans
dated April 2000, prepared by Inter-Mountain Engineering, Ltd. for the
Town of Avon; and (C) streetscape improvements to the segment between
- the eastern terminus of Beaver Creek Place and the western boundary of
The Village (at Avon), which improvements shall be in general
conformance with the streetscape improvements within Planning Area A.
Subject to the Town's timely issuance of the requisite permits, the District
shall commence the Phase 3 Improvements by April 15, 2005, and shall
employ commercially reasonable efforts to cause completion of the
Phase 3 Improvements on or before December 31, 2005; provided,
however, that in the event of an earlier re-subdivision of any area within
Planning Areas A through F, inclusive, within The Village (at Avon)
492674.12 MLAYER 104/01 8:04 AM 5
•
Filing No. 1, the District shall commence the Phase 3 Improvements by
April 15, and shall employ commercially reasonable efforts to cause
completion thereof by December 31, of the year immediately following
the recordation of any final subdivision plat which re-subdivides any such
area.
(iv) Phase 4 of the East Beaver Creek Boulevard Improvements
(the "Phase 4 Improvements") shall consist of converting the Phase 2
Improvements from temporary to permanent by the construction of (A) a
permanent extension from the east terminus of Beaver Creek Place to the
Highway 6 Connector Road in accordance with the road standards set
forth in Section 1.5 of the PUD Guide, and (B) final design and
construction of a connection to Chapel Place. The District shall cause the
Phase 4 Improvements to be commenced and completed in accordance
with the subdivision process involving Planning Areas A through J,
inclusive.
(o) Section 4.3(c) is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
(c) Subject to all necessary permits and approvals having been
issued for the following described roadway improvements, which permits and approvals
the District shall diligently pursue, the District shall construct a two-lane paved general
circulation road with grades not exceeding ten percent (10%) and otherwise in
accordance with the road standards set forth in Section I-5 of the PUD Guide, which road
shall extend easterly from the point where Swift Gulch Road terminates in Planning Area
RMF-2 to the road designed to pass under Interstate 70 and serve Planning Areas R IF-1,
RMF-3 and Residential Lot 1 and Lots 6-96 (the "Swift Gulch Road Improvements").
The Swift Gulch Road Improvements shall be completed at the time of completion of the
Interstate 70 Improvements, and shall include six foot (6') wide paved shoulders on both
sides, or, in lieu thereof, if mutually agreed upon by the District and the Town, a ten foot
(10') wide paved bike / pedestrian path on one side of the road, which shall be separated
from the roadway. Within sixty (60) days after receipt of an itemized statement and
supporting documentation for such costs, the Town shall reimburse the District for the
full cost of paving the six foot wide shoulders, based on the unit cost of asphalt paving
for the Swift Gulch Road Improvements.
(p) Section 4.3(d) is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
(d) _-Within thirty (3.0) days after the Town's issuance of the
first certificate of occupancy (temporary or final) for any improvement within Planning
Areas K or L, Owner shall convey to the Town a parcel of land which is described as
"Lot 5, The Village (at Avon) Filing 1" in the final plan submittal package which Owner
submitted to the Town on June , 2001. Upon Owner's determination of the
location and subsequent to the recordation of a final plat for the relevant Planning Area,
Owner shall convey to the Eagle River Fire Protection District a parcel of land to be used
exclusively for construction and operation of a fire protection facility, which shall consist
of approximately one buildable acre in a location designated by Owner, and which may
492674.12 MI.AYBR 10/al s:w AM 6
•
be located within Planning Area N or an "OS" or "P" Planning Area. The foregoing
dedications constitute, collectively, the "Public Works Dedication." Construction and
operation of the public works facility and the fire protection facility shall comply with the
terms of the Development Plan and architectural standards and design guidelines
established by the Design Review Board. In compliance with any such design guidelines,
but at least ninety (90) days prior to commencing construction of any improvements on
any such site or sites, the Town or the Eagle River Fire Protection District, as applicable,
shall deliver to the Design Review Board copies of plans for such improvements. Owner
or the District may at its sole option and at its sole expense, upgrade all or any portion of
the exteriors of such improvements.
(q) Section 4.3(i) is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
0) The District shall include in its first bond issue proceeds of
no less than the amount reasonably estimated by the District to be the cost of constructing the
interstate 70 Interchange, which proceeds shall be dedicated to paying the costs of constructing
such Interstate 70 Interchange. If, at de the tthe District's hat the Interstate t70oInterchange will be
and
reasonably anticipated by the District
completed within three (3) years, the District may, with the approval of the Town, delay issuance
of the Interstate 70 Interchange portion of such issue to avoid adversely affecting the federal
income tax exemption of interest on the bonds, but only until such time as completion of the
Interstate 70 Interchange is reasonably anticipated by the District and the Town to occur within
three (3) years. Such bond proceeds shall be deposited into an escrow account to, among other
things, ensure to the Town that, if the District fails to apply such bond proceeds toward purchase
of a CDOT completion bond or as other security to CDOT as contemplated in Section 4.2, or
otherwise towards construction of the Interstate 70 Interchange, the Town will have access to
such proceeds for such purposes. The Town acknowledges, however, that if the District provides
to CDOT the completion bond or other security acceptable to CDOT with respect to completion
of the Interstate 70 Interchange as contemplated by the last sentence of Section 4.2, the District
shall have no obligation to also provide separate security to the Town with respect to completion
of the Interstate 70 Interchange.
(r) Section 4.4 is amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
4.4 Public Facilities. Owner has created two public improvement
companies having as members all property owners within the Project (collectively, the
"Public Improvement Companies") and two special districts (collectively, the "Special
Districts") to facilitate financing and development of the infrastructure improvements and
public facilities of the Project, including, without limitation, development of the road and right
utility improvements contemplated by the Develop annt Plan. Owner p c reserves d strict ?as may
to create such additional public improvement comp
be necessary or desirable from time to time, and the Town shall reasonably cooperate
with Owner with respect to the creation of such additional entities. The formation
documents of the Public Improvement Companies and the Special Districts, together with
contract entered into by and between the Public Improvement Companies and the
Special Districts, require the Public Improvement Companies and the Special District to
honor their obligations under this Agreement, including the obligation of the Public
492674.12 MLAYER 10/4/018:04 AM 7 IN
•
Improvement Companies to remit to the Special Districts the portion of the Project Fees
equal to the corresponding Town tax. Accordingly, the Public Improvement Companies
have established the mechanisms for imposing and collecting within the Property the
Project Fees as contemplated in Section 4.5. The District will provide public facilities
and services that the Town might otherwise have to provide, and has entered into
contractual arrangements with the Public Improvement Companies with respect to the
performance and financing of such obligations. The Town shall cooperate with the
operation of the Special Districts, and with the implementation of the financing,
development and maintenance of the public facilities for the Project.
Pursuant to Section 4.11, the Public Improvement Companies shall keep
sufficient records with respect to assessment and collection of the Project Fees, and shall
require the filing of returns by the appropriate business or person with respect thereto, to
ensure that there will be an adequate audit trail with respect to the matters addressed in
this Section 4.4 and in Section 4.5. If the Public Improvement Companies are unable to
collect any portion of the Project Fees due to delinquency, deficiency, or failure to file,
the Public Improvement Companies may promptly notify the Town in writing, and the
Town shall institute the procedures authorized under the Municipal Code to enforce and
collect the corresponding Town tax, interest, penalties and costs. The Town shall then
remit such tax revenues to the Public Improvement Companies or to the District, subject
to the following conditions: (a) the Town shall retain an amount equal to its costs
incurred in enforcing its collection of taxes under the Municipal Code, as well as an
administrative fee equal to [20%] of any tax and/or penalty actually collected; (b) the
obligation is subject to any prior lien on such Town taxes securing the Town's sales tax
revenue bonds outstanding as of the date of the Original Agreement; (c) the Town will
have no responsibility to collect any increment of the Project Fees which is in excess of
the corresponding Town tax or which is assessed against any transaction that is exempt
from the corresponding Town tax under the Municipal Code as then in effect; and (d) the
Town does not guarantee or insure that it will be able to collect any delinquent or
deficient Project Fees. Under no circumstances shall the Town be subject to any legal
liability to the Public Improvement Companies or to the Special Districts on account of
the Town's failure to collect some or all of the delinquent or deficient Project Fees on
behalf of such entities.
The Town acknowledges that if the person or entity which failed to timely
pay such Project Fee subsequently remits such Project Fee to the Public Improvement
Company, such payment shall result in the application of a simultaneous credit against
such person or entity's tax obligation, which credit shall fully satisfy any corresponding
tax liability to the Town. --The Town shall nevertheless be entitled to recover from the
Public Improvement Company the administrative fee and any costs incurred in the
enforcement and recovery of such Project Fees.
(s) The initial three sentences of Section 4.5 are amended and restated to read
in their entirety as follows (all other sentences of Section 4.5 being unaffected hereby):
The applicable Public Improvement Company may assess a sales and/or
use fee on certain transactions occurring, and products used or consumed, within the
492674.(2 MLAYn 10/4/018:04 AM 8
0 •
Project, including any retail sales occurring and/or building materials used within the
Project (such sales and/or use fees constituting, collectively, the "Retail Sales Fee"), and
a real estate transfer fee on certain transfers of real property within the Project (the "Real
Estate Transfer Fee"), and an accommodations/lodging fee on certain lodging
accommodations transactions within the Project (the "Accommodations/Lodging Fee").
The portion of the proceeds of such Retail Sales Fee, Real Estate Transfer Fee and any
Accommodations/Lodging Fee which is equal to the corresponding Town tax shall be
pledged and remitted to one or more of the Districts, and any portion if such fees which
exceeds the amount of the corresponding Town tax may be retained by the applicable
Public Improvement Company, in either case to be applied toward payment of
infrastructure and public facilities costs for ongoing operation, maintenance and
administrative expenses of the Project, including, without limitation, contractual
obligations of such Districts to the Town. Subject to the provisions set forth below, so
long as the Public Improvement Company imposes such Retail Sales Fee, Real Estate
Transfer Fee and/or Accommodations/Lodging Fee, in consideration therefor and for the
remittance and application of proceeds from such Project Fees toward payment of the
costs of providing and maintaining infrastructure improvements and public facilities for
the Project as provided herein, the Town shall waive with respect to transactions
occurring within the Project imposition of the corresponding retail sales taxes, use taxes,
real estate transfer taxes and accommodations/lodging taxes otherwise applicable within
the Town, except any sales or accommodations tax increases duly adopted by the Town
after the date of this Agreement, the proceeds of which increases are dedicated to specific
projects identified in connection with such adoption.
(t) Section 4.10(a)(iii) is amended and restated to read in its entirety as
follows:
(iii) The Property is included within the boundaries of, and is subject to
property tax assessment for, the Eagle River Fire Protection District.
Accordingly, the Town shall not include within any Municipal Services Invoice,
and neither Owner nor the District shall have any obligation to the Town for, any
assessment of cost for regional fire protection services.
(u) Section 4. 1 0(a)(vi)(B) is deleted in its entirety.
(v) Section 4.10(a)(vii) is amended and restated to read in its entirety as
follows:
(vii) the sum of all charges described in clauses (i) through
(vi) above with respect to a particular Municipal Services Invoice
shall constitute the total amount due to the Town from the Project
and the Property with respect to the Town's provision of the
Municipal Services for the applicable year (each, a "Required
Municipal Services Payment').
11
C]
492674.12 MLAYn 10/4/01 8:04 AM 9
0
(w) The introductory sentence of Section 4.13 and subparagraph (a) of Section
4.13 are amended and restated to read in their entirety as follows (subparagraph (b) of
Section 4.13 being unaffected hereby):
4.13 Design Review. Owner shall establish a design
review board to review for conformity with the PUD Guide and
applicable covenants, conditions and restrictions development
proposals for the Property or any portion of the Property (the
"Design Review Board").
(a) The Design Review Board shall consist of
not more than five (5) members, one (1) of whom shall be a
member of the Town's Planning and Zoning Commission
designated by the Town from time to time, and the remainder of
whom shall be appointed as provided in the governing documents
of the Design Review Board.
(x) A new Section 4.14(f) is inserted to read in its entirety as follows:
0
(f) If the District becomes liable for payment to the Town of the
applicable annual shortfall as described above because either Wal-Mart or City Market,
or both, have vacated their respective present sites within the Town and relocated to a site
within the Property, and if either Wal-Mart or City Market, or both, subsequently cease
for any reason to operate in a site within the Property, then the applicable District shall
thereupon be relieved from any further obligation or liability to the Town with respect to
any further payment of the applicable annual shortfall even though such vacated space
within the Property may later be occupied by a business that is substantially similar to
Wal-Mart or City Market, as the case may be, but is unrelated to such entity; provided,
however, that regardless of any change in ownership or change in the trade name used for
the business, neither Wal-Mart nor City Market will be considered to have ceased to
operate within the Property for so long as the business operation continues in a
substantially similar form to that operated by Wal-Mart or City Market, as applicable, if
such operation is conducted under the same or another name by an affiliate, parent or
subsidiary of Wal-Mart and/or City Market, respectively.
(y) Pursuant to the terms
following addresses for notice or
originally set forth in Section 6.8
unaffected hereby):
492674.12 NR AVER 10141018:04 AM
of Section 6.8, the parties hereby designate the
communication in substitution of the addresses
(the substantive provisions of Section 6.8 being
10
0
If to Town:
Town of Avon
P.O. Box 975
400 Benchmark Road
Avon, Colorado 81620
Attn: Town Manager
With a copy to:
Town of Avon
P.O. Box 975
400 Benchmark Road
Avon, Colorado 81620
Attn: Town Attorney
If to Owner by mail delivery:
Traer Creek LLC
EMD Limited Liability Company
P.O. Box 640
Vail, Colorado 81658
Attn: William J. Post, Esq.
Or, for delivery other than by mail:
Traer Creek LLC
EMD Limited Liability Company
0322 East Beaver Creek Blvd.
Avon, Colorado 81620
Attn: William J. Post, Esq.
With a copy to:
•
Otten, Johnson, Robinson, Neff & Ragonetti, P.C.
950 17th Street, Suite 1600
Denver, Colorado 80202
Attn: Thomas J. Ragonetti, Esq.
Munsey L. Ayers, Esq.
If to the District:
Traer Creek Metropolitan District
c/o McGeady Sisneros, P.C.
1675 Broadway, Suite 2100
Denver, Colorado 80202
Attn: Darlene Sisneros, Esq.
•
•
C
492614.12 MLAYBR 10141018:04 AM 11
0
3. District's Assumption of Obligations; Release. By its execution of this First
® Amendment, and subject to the limitations set forth below, the District ratifies and assumes each
® and every obligation of the District and/or Districts as set forth and described in any provision of
the Original Agreement, as contemplated in Sections 4.4 and 6.9 of the Original Agreement. The
Town acknowledges that, pursuant to Section 6.9 of the Original Agreement, the District's
foregoing express assumption of such obligations operates to relieve ENO and Traer of any
further obligations under the Original Agreement, as modified by this First Amendment, with
respect to those matters which the District has assumed. The Town further acknowledges that
the District's assumption of such obligations is subject to annual budget and appropriation, and is
subordinate to any bonds issued by the District.
4. Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly modified by this First Amendment,
the Original Agreement is unmodified, and is hereby ratified and affirmed, and shall remain in
full force and effect in accordance with its terms. If there is any inconsistency between the terms
of the Original Agreement and the terms of this First Amendment, the provisions of this First
Amendment shall govern and control.
5. Authority to Amend; Vesting of Property Rights. In accordance with the terms
and conditions of Section 1.4 of the Original Agreement, the Town's approval of this First
Amendment is subject to the public notice and public hearing procedures required for approval
of the Original Agreement. Because the Original Agreement constitutes a site specific
development plan which established statutory vested property rights pursuant to Article 68 of
Title 24, C.R.S., as amended, and because this First Amendment is an amendment thereto, the
Town shall adopt an ordinance ratifying this First Amendment and shall cause publication of the
notice described in Section 24-68-103(1), C.R.S., as amended. Pursuant to Section 17.14.050 of
the Municipal Code:
Approval of this plan constitutes a vested property right pursuant to
Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended.
6. Governing Law. This First Amendment shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado.
7. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed in one or more
counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all such counterparts taken
together shall constitute one and the same instrument.
E
4M74.12 ML.AYn I0/4018:04AM 12
•
u
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Town and Owner have executed this First
Amendment as of the day and year first above set forth.
OWNER:
TRAER CREEK LLC, a Colorado limited liability
company
By:
Name: Magnus Lindholm
Title: Manager
EMD LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, a
Colorado limited liability company
By: LAVA CORPORATION, a Colorado
corporation, its Manager
Rv-
Name: Magnus Lindholm •
Title: President
THE DISTRICT:
TRAER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a
quasi-municipal corporation and political
subdivision of the State of Colorado
By:
Name: William J. Post
Title: President
ATTEST:
By:
Name:
Title: Secretary
11
4M74.12 MLAM 10/4Ol 6:04 AM 13
•
E
THE TOWN:
® TOWN OF AVON, a municipal corporation of the
State of Colorado
Name:
Title: Mayor
Approved as to legal form by:
Name:
Title:
0
L'
Town Attorney
492674,12 M[AYER 10/4/01 8:04 AM 14
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss:
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2001, by Magnus Lindholm as Manager of Traer Creek LLC, a Colorado
limited liability company.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss:
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2001, by Magnus Lindholm, as President of LAVA Corporation, a Colorado
corporation, as Manager of EMD Limited Liability Company, a Colorado limited liability
company.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
11
11
492674.12 MLAYER 10/4/01 8:04 AM 15
® STATE OF COLORADO
COUNTY OF
)
ss:
0
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2001, by William J. Post as President of Traer Creek Metropolitan District, a
quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
E COUNTY OF
STATE OF COLORADO
ss:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
2001, by as Mayor of the Town
of Avon, a municipal corporation of the State of Colorado.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
E
492674.12 MLAYER 10/4/01 8:04 AM
16
Me o
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Bill Efting, Town Manager
From Ruth Borne, Director of Community Development
Eric Johnson, Planning Technician
DaW November 7, 2001
Re: First Reading of Ordinance 01-17, An Ordinance Amending the Wildridge
PUD for Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
Summary
The Town of Avon is applying to amend the Wildridge PUD to increase the development
rights on Lot 12 Block 4 from single-family to duplex. Incorrect development information on
Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision was provided to the owner who relied upon this
information in purchasing the property. Staff erroneously informed the owner that the
property had development rights for a duplex residence by providing evidence of the duplex
zoning via fax (copy attached to staff report).
The Planning and Zoning Commission determined that the increase of development rights
on Lot 12 Block 4 Wildridge, from single-family to duplex, would not negatively affect
Wildridge. The Commission further determined that the PUD amendment was in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, Policy A1.1 that states, "Development and
redevelopment will be of a scale and intensity appropriate for the neighborhood in which it is
located." Duplex-zoned lots surround the property. The property is on the north side of
Wildridge Road and is adjacent to Forest Service property. In Wildridge, there are only
fourteen (14) lots zoned single-family out of 353 lots in Wildridge. Ten (10) of the single-
family lots are in Block 1 located on Beaver Creek Point. There is only one other single
family zoned lot in Block 4.
Based upon discussions with the Town Attorney, the Town has filed an application for a
PUD Amendment to increase the development rights on the property to a duplex. Attached,
please find a memo prepared by Burt Levin, Town Attorney, outlining the legal theory
supporting this matter. On October 16, 2001 the Planning and Zoning Commission
approved Resolution 01-16, recommending approval to the Town Council for the PUD
Amendment.
Memo to Town Council, November 13, 2001 Page 1 of 2
Ordinance 01-17, Amend Lot 12 Wildridge PUD
r
Background
• 1978 Wildridge Final Plat - 356 lots, 830 Dwelling Units (Lot 12, Block 4 zoned for
duplex)
• 1980 Wildridge RePlat Number 1: 352 lots, 830 DU (Lot 12, Block 4 zoned duplex)
1981 Wildridge RePlat Number 2: 338 lots, 849 DU (Lot 12, Block 4 zoned single-
family)
• August 15, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial of the
PUD amendment to Council.
• August 22, 2000, the owner withdrew the application.
• October 16, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of
the PUD amendment to Council.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Town Council pass Ordinance 01-17, amending Wildridge PUD
to increase the development rights for Lot 12 Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision from single-
family to duplex.
Alternatives
1. Approve on First Reading
2. Deny on First Reading
Proposed Motion
"I move to approve on first reading Ordinance 01-17, approving an amendment to the
Wildridge PUD for Lot 12 Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County,
Colorado. "
Town Manager Comments
Attachments:
A. Ordinance 01-17
B. Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report
C. Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 01-16
E
E
Memo to Town Council, November 13, 2001 Page 2 of 2
Ordinance 01-17, Amend Lot 12 Wildridge PUD
TOWN OF AVON
0 ORDINANCE NO. 01-17
SERIES OF 2001
AN ORDINANCE APPROVING AN AMENDMENT OF THE
WILDRIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR
LOTS 12 BLOCK 4, WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF
AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Town of Avon has applied to amend the Wildridge PUD for Lot 12
Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, to increase the development rights from single-family to duplex;
and
WHEREAS, the proper posting, publication and public notices for the hearings before
the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon were provided as required by law; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public
hearing on October 16, 2001, at which time the applicant and the public were given an
opportunity to express their opinions and present certain information and reports regarding the
proposed PUD amendment; and
WHEREAS, following such public hearing, the Planning & Zoning Commission
forwarded its recommendations on the proposed PUD amendment to the Town Council of the
Town of Avon; and
WHEREAS, after notices provided by law, this Council held a public hearing on the
day of November, 2001, at which time the public was given an opportunity to express
their opinions regarding the proposed PUD amendment; and
WHEREAS, based upon the evidence, testimony, and exhibits, and a study of the
Comprehensive Plan of the Town of Avon, Town Council of the Town of Avon finds as follows:
F:\Council (c)\Ordinances\2001\Ord 01-17 L12 B4 WR PUD amendment.doc
1. The hearings before the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Town Council
were both extensive and complete and that all pertinent facts, matters and issues
were submitted at those hearings.
2. That the amendment of the Wildridge PUD for Lot12 Block 4, Wildridge
Subdivision is consistent with goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive
Plan, is compatible with surrounding neighborhood and is consistent with the
public interest.
3. That the development standards for Lot 12 Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
comply with each of the Town of Avon's PUD design criteria and that this
proposed development is consistent with the public interest.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF AVON, COLORADO, THAT:
The amendment to the Wildridge PUD for Lot 12 Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, to increase
the development rights from single-family to duplex is hereby approved with no conditions.
INTRODUCED, PASSED ON FIRST READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
POSTED, this day of November, 2001, and a public hearing shall be held at the regular
meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado, on the day of, November
2001, at 5:30 P.M. in the Municipal Building of the Town of Avon, Colorado.
Town of Avon, Colorado
Town Council
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash, Town Clerk
11
F:ACouncil (c)AOrdinances\2001\Ord 01-17 L12 S4 WR PUD amendment.doc
C7
INTRODUCED, PASSED ON SECOND READING, APPROVED AND ORDERED
POSTED.
Town of Avon, Colorado
Town Council
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash, Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
11
Burt Levin, Town Attorney
r:
FACouncil (c)\Ordinances\2001\Ord 01-17 L12 B4 WR PUD amendment.doc
TOWN OF AVON 0
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 01-16
SERIES OF 2001
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL OF
THE TOWN OF AVON APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE
WILDRIDGE PUD FOR LOT 12, BLOCK 4, WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION,
TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
WHEREAS, Alice Leeds has applied for an amendment to the Wildridge PUD to convert
Lot 12, Block 4 from a single-family lot to a duplex lot.
WHEREAS, after notices required by law, a public hearing on said application was held by
the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon.
WHEREAS, said application is consistent with all legal requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission
hereby recommends to the Town Council of the Town of Avon approval of the application
for amendment to the Wildridge PUD to establish Lot 12, Block 4 as a duplex lot.
ADOPTED THIS 161h DAY OF OCTOBER, 2001
Sig
Date:
Chris Evans, Chair
/d /ib /o/
t:
Date: (o U Zf-V
T7 I
, AJ>eEG? /c'lq?,< 01V
11
Town of Avon
e PUD
Staff Report
October 16, 2001 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Report Date October 9, 2001
Project Type Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amended
Legal Description Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
Current Zoning Single Family (PUD)
Address 5712 Wildridge Road East
Introduction
According to the Final Subdivision Plat, Replat Number 2 of Wildridge, Town of Avon, Lot 12,
Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision has development rights for a single-family residence. The Town
of Avon is applying to amend the PUD to increase the development rights on the site for a
duplex residence on the site. On August 15, 2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission
reviewed this application and recommend denial of the application to Council by Resolution 00-
06. The applicant then withdrew its application to Council on August 22, 2000.
This issue is brought before you because incorrect development information on Lot 12, Block 4,
Wildridge Subdivision was provided to the owner. Staff erroneously informed the owner that the
property had development rights for a duplex residence by providing evidence of the duplex
zoning via fax (copy attached). The owner relied upon this information in purchasing the
property.
Based upon discussions with the Town Attorney, the Town has filed an application for a PUD
Amendment to increase the development rights on the property to a duplex. Attached, please
find a memo prepared by Burt Levin, Town Attorney, outlining the legal theory supporting this
matter.
There has been several letters received in opposition to this application, which have been
attached to this report. The criteria for amending the PUD are set forth below and provide an
adequate basis for approving the PUD amendment for this property.
PUD Review Criteria
1. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Objectives.
Policy A1.1: Development and redevelopment will be of a scale and intensity appropriate
for the neighborhood in which it is located.
This proposal is consistent with the goals and policies of the Town by supporting residential
uses.
2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the Town, the sub-area
design recommendations and design guidelines of the Town.
The project is surrounded by duplex properties. Lot 12, Block 4, is almost an acre in size.
The site abuts Tract J, which is Town owned designated open space and then extends onto
Forest Service property. The project will have to conform to all of the design criteria
established by the Town through the Final Design review process.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge, Planned Unit Development Amendment page 2 of 3
October 16, 2001 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood and adjacent
properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, 40
character, and orientation.
The property was granted Final Design review in 1998 for a single-family home. Staff
erroneously identified this property as a duplex lot in the Staff Report. All of the design
factors suggest that a duplex design is compatible with the environment, neighborhood and
the adjacent properties. Most of the adjacent lots are zoned as duplex lots. There are only
fourteen (14) single-family lots out of 353 lots in Wildridge. Ten (10) of the single-family
lots are in Block 1 located on Beaver Creek Point. There is only one other single family
zoned lot in Block 4.
4. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that
affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed.
There are no known natural or geologic hazards on this site.
5. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and
off site traffic circulation that is compatible with the town transportation plan.
One access point from Wildridge Road for this property will accommodate the traffic and
circulation constraints for this site compatible with Town requirements.
6. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and
preserve natural features, recreation, views and function.
A duplex on this property will not have a significant impact on the views from surrounding
properties nor will it affect adjacent Town owned open space (Tract J) and the existing
easement for the Town water storage facilities.
7. 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.
There is no phasing plan.
8. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems,
roads, parks, and police and fire protection.
Public services are adequate to accommodate the addition of one dwelling unit.
9. 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.
Traffic will not be adversely impacted by the addition of one dwelling unit.
10. Development Standards
The change from a single-family to a duplex residence will not affect the Wildridge PUD
development standards now in effect for this property.
Recommended Motion
I move to approve the Planning & Zoning Resolution 01-16, recommending approval of the
application for amendment to the Wildridge PUD to establish Lot 12 Block 4, Wildridge
Subdivision as a duplex lot.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749
Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge, Planned Unit Development Amendment
October 16, 2001 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 3 of 3
If you have any questions regarding this project or anything in this report, please call me at 748-
4009 or stop by the Community Development Department.
Respectfully submitted,
V`
R th O. Borne
C.
1]
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484030 Fax (970) 949-5749
I
..yyt? °M1t' 1? rlrer t!U!l i?'4P.at? I?4i1Rt =JT
•s ,
V1ldsldRe Lewd v00
*
.1-!1R# k!!
e oc i A_Iti
1 p..p1?w O. A7
2 ONO a *c O.o
oth
m ?
y rcpt' w 1.
i
w
` O"
l sorb
aftux l.s!
a
.
1
9 0"PIR+c i1
t.
IA Dupl<9
tt 0.96
13 0.6r
t i DWplan 0. 7!
1S 13vp 3 ax O.i?
f6 nuples O•?1
17 Dug t a.c 0.6 S
1• Duple` 0.44
39 Duplex 0.66
20 W*10u 0.76
j 1 fR.p to: t.14
77 Dn IU*
22
23 DUVIS%
t,bl
IhOplwme 0.93
is n,.pIa+ t.00
ti Daplef 1.20
7
2
27 Trip I CU 1.17
28 aupI.x 1.&?
29 IAI'pl ex 1, !!
!0 DN/t 101• 1.50
)1 0"P lux 1.23
32 Duplex p?9??
33 pupfax o.sr
Si p..paOY 0.80
M.plaw 0.67
35 oaspl.s D. ?7
36 Dyp?e= 1.02
31 DuPt'ee 2.46
ss D..plex 0.71
39 puptwt 0.q!
40 Duplex 1.26
6l 4-71e1A 0.66
41 6-21109 1.15
is D„ylOx, 0.114
it /li?p1 ea
AS
CJ
11
?,.s? .?j•?' des' Co ao-so- LWI
Y 1;
• MEMORANDUM
FROM: Burt Levin, Town Attorney
TO: Hon. Mayor and Town Council
RE: Ordinance No. 10, Series of 2000
DATE: August 16, 2000
Attached is a first reader copy of Ordinance 10, Series of 2000, which, if enacted,
changes the zoning for Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, from single family to
duplex.
Also attached is Community Development's Staff' Report to the Planning & Zoning
Commission regarding the rezoning of the lot. Community Development recommended
to P&Z that the lot be rezoned.
This rezoning application is made in the name of the Town and at the request of the
owner of the lot in question. The reason the application has been made in the name of the
Town is to correct an unfairness, or a potential unfairness, to the owner of the lot.
Before purchasing the lot in question, the current owner inquired of the Community
Development Department whether the zoning on the lot would permit construction of a
duplex as well as a single family home. A staff member of the Community Development
Dept. erroneously informed the owner that the lot was zoned to allow either single family
or duplex. The staffer also faxed the owner a sheet prepared by Community
Development listing her lot as being zoned for a duplex. (A copy of the fax with the
erroneous information is attached hereto.) (Also attached is a copy of a Commmunity
Development Staff Report dated April 2, 1999, showing the zoning on the lot as duplex.)
In reliance on the statement she received from the Town, the owner entered into a
contract to purchase the lot. The contract was silent concerning the zoning.
After she purchased the lot, the owner made inquiries to the Town concerning
construction of a duplex, but was informed that the lot is zoned to permit only a single
_...__.-family home: -The-owne?asseits-that she would-not have pur -h:-4rjP-d t-hy-t -W if e-had-been
aware that it was not zoned to permit construction of a duplex. The owner requested that
the zoning on the lot be changed to be consistent with the information she received from
the Town, and upon which she relied.
As a staff, we asked ourselves whether the owner should have realized the zoning was
single family notwithstanding the contrary information she received from the Community
Development Dept. prior to entering into a contract to purchase the lot. We concluded
that as a practical matter the owner had done exactly what she should have done to
ascertain the zoning on the lot before signing the contract. There would have been no
practical reason for the owner to doubt what she had been informed by the Town
department which includes the Zoning Administrator (i.e. no reason for her to come in
and inspect the official zone map).. So, we concluded that the owner's reliance on the
erroneous factual information she received from the Town was reasonable.
The owner has not threatened to sue the Town to conform the zoning of her lot to duplex,
but such a suit could have merit. The legal principle involved is a simple one based on
fairness. If a governmental entity makes a factual assertion to a citizen, and the citizen
changes his or her position in reasonable reliance on such factual assertion, the
government may not later disavow its factual representation. In other words, if a citizen
reasonably and detrimentally relies on a factual representation of a responsible
government official, the government is "estopped" from denying the validity of its
assertion. See Colorado Water Ouality Control Commission v Town of Frederick, 641
P.2d 958 (Colo. 1982).
The doctrine of estopped supports the Town's application to rezone the lot in question.
The owner claims she relied on the information she received from the Town concerning
the zoning, and that she would not have purchased the lot had she know the zoning was in
fact other that what she had been told by the Town. The owner's reliance on the Town's
representation was reasonable because (1) it came from the responsible official, and (2) in
fact the vast majority of lots in Wildridge, including the lots immediately surrounding her
lot, are zoned for duplex (or three or four-plex).
As the staff report of Community Development to the P&Z on this matter indicates,
setting aside the unfairness to the owner which would result if the lot is not rezoned, the
lot in fact is appropriate for a duplex. There are only 9 lots in Wildridge zoned single
family. (Indeed, at one time the lot in question was itself zoned as a duplex lot.) Since
the vast majority of the lots in the vicinity of the lot in question are zoned duplex, there is
no question but that rezoning to duplex would be consistent with the Town's
comprehensive plan and the surrounding neighborhood. Obviously there is adequate
infrastructure to accommodate a duplex on the lot in question.
P&Z denied the Town's application to rezone the lot. I advised P&Z that it could and
should consider the legal principle of estoppel in deciding this matter. Based on its
comments, the Commission appears to have believed that it should disregard the equities
of the situation and not take into account the doctrine of estoppel, instead, leaving the
equities of the question to the Town Council. In denying the Town's application to
rezone the lot in question, the Coimiiission seems to have determined simpry that as an
abstract matter Wildridge should not be up-zoned.
Attached please find five letters of comment from members of the public.
In conclusion, the Town staff believes a rezoning of the lot is the only fair outcome in
this case in view of the owner's reasonable reliance on the Town's representation to her
that the lot she was about to purchase was zonal for a duplex.
• Memo
To: Planning & Zoning Commission, Honorable Mayor and Town Council
From: Burt Levin, Town Attorney
Date July 24, 2000
Re: Resolution No. 00-06, PUD Amendment for Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge
Subdivision from a single-family lot to a duplex lot
Summary: The owner of Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision ("the Property")
purchased the property in 1999. Staff provided the owner with land use information
via fax, which indicated the Property, was zoned duplex. The owner reasonably
relied upon this land use information in purchasing the Property. The Property is
surrounded by duplex lots, abuts Forest Service property, and is almost an acre in
size.
Recently, the owner contacted staff and was informed the Property is in fact a single-
family lot. The owner presented the fax copy provided by our office indicating the
property is a duplex lot.
The case law in Colorado and other jurisdictions is clear. If a person detrimentally
relies upon erroneous information provided by a governmental entity, then the Town
is estopped from denying the owner the remedy. In other words, the owner of Lot 12,
Block 4, Wildridge, purchased the property based upon the incorrect information that
the Property allowed a duplex. The owner contends that she would not have
purchased the property had the correct information been disclosed i.e, that the
Property is limited to a single family residence. It is unjust to prevent the owner from
obtaining what she thought she was purchasing.
Recommendation: Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission
recommend approval of the PUD Amendment for Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge
Subdivision.
F:ooundVmemas/200M12b4wr
Pi CLz1, V
Planning and Zoning Commission's Recording Secretary OC
Town of Avon T 1 ZUO
PO Box 975 COmmunily pevelo
Avon, CO 81620 Pment
October 6, 2001
To whom it concerns:
We are opposed to the re-zoning of Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision from single-family to
duplex residence for the following reasons:
1. Lot 12 was re-zoned in 1981 from duplex to single family to compensate for an overall
Wildridge plat density increase from approximately 830 to 849 units. No rationale has
been provided in your notice to justify the additional density increase resulting from this
proposal.
2. As prospective buyers of this lot circa 1998, we had a soil survey conducted as a condition
of purchase. At that time, the soil survey indicated great erosion potential and soil
instability in wet conditions due to the nature of the subsurface and steep grade of the lot.
A multi-family dwelling in this location can only exacerbate the potential problem Our soil
survey can be nlade available upon request.
3. As owners of Lot 83, Block 4, we are directly below the subject property. If the re-zoning
is approved, we feel we may suffer economic loss in the future based on the conditions
stated above.
Thank you for your attention.
Regards,
6?,d4 /____
John and Janet Perdzock
1289 Sugarhill Lane
Xenia, OH 45385
937-372-4237 (please leave message)
G
Lyn mid Joanne Morgan
5735 Wildridge Road East
Avon, CO 81620
970 949.4436
•
October 15, 2001
Avon Planning and Zoning Commission
Recording Secretary
PO Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
Re: The re-zoning of Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
RECEIVED
0 C T 15 2001
Community l iopt
It seems as if we just addressed this issue and, in fact we did, in August of last year. Having
already expressed our disapproval of the plan at that time, I will simply reiterate that we are
still opposed to allowing the down-zoning of the property owned by Alice Leeds.
The first time around, Ms. Leeds claimed that she should be allowed to re-zone the lot because
when she purchased the lot she didn't know it was zoned single family. (This is hard to under-
stand because the property was sold with already approved single-family home plans designed
for use on the property.) However, after experiencing negative response from the neighboring
homeowners in addition to a denial by Planning and Zoning, she withdrew her request. One
year later, with the lot still priced higher than comparable sites, she has returned to try again.
Our reason for wanting her request to be denied is simply that we do not want to see the
Town of Avon begin to change the zoning on residential properties. We are in agreement
with all of our neighbors who feel that the Town of Avon should not change the zoning on
Ms. Leeds' lot. Down-zoning will depress the valuation of nearby existing single-family homes
and increase neighborhood traffic. Because only one road leads to Wildridge we believe the
Town should look for ways to up-zone instead of down-zone.
Sincerely,
Lyn J. organ
S. r46TQC-t1J
?
n S. Morgan
11
John & Donnis McDonald RECEIVED
5730 Wildridge Road E
PO Box 1185 O CT 10 2001
Avon, Co. 81620
(Lot 10, Blk 4) Community Developme
October 9, 2001
Town of Avon, Planning and Zoning Comm.
P O Box 975
Avon, Co. 81620
Attn: Recording Secretary
Re: Opposition to rezoning Lot 12 Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision
Dear Commissioners;:
We are shocked and disappointed that the Town is pre-disposed to rezone the lot (12,Blk 4) in
Wildridge before the public hearing noticed in your letter of 2 Oct. 01 to some of the nearby residents.
We have not received a letter here in Avon or at our Birmingham, Al office (101 Lockerbie Lane, 35223)
This matter was addressed last year, Re: our letter dtd 14 August, 00 to your office. The
Board/Commission wisely rejected the petition to rezone at that time. How many times will it recur ?
The owners / developers were aware of the zoning and approved use recorded Planed Use and
Development documents for Wildridge before purchase and at closing, via the Title policy.
There is no duplex construction on the upper (north) side of Wildridge road for several blocks in ether
direction from Lot 12. This is by choice of all the adjacent owners to create an ambiance and quality of
Neighborhood. Although our lot and others were initially zoned duplex, regard for the immediate
neighborhood dictated that a single family structure would best complement the resale value in this
section (also the tax base for the city of Avon)
The topography and physical dimensions of the lot in question are difficult for a single family
construction but particularly challenging for the more complex considerations of a duplex applicationi
concerning elevations, street access, snow and water flows and specifically foundation and excavation
stability. Considerable engineering and architectural study should be developed before any attempt to
multiply the construction and safety problems are addressed by the Board / Commission / Council
In light of the above concerns and last year's numerous property owners protests, it does not appear to
be " for the good of the community' , neighborhood, the city of Avon, 911 services, building inspectors,
insurance and liability carriers or the aesthetics of the area to approve this rezoning application.
Please exercise your responsibility to the town and neighborhood and deny the violation /deviation from
the recorded Planned Use and Development Restrictions for this (lot 12 Blk 4) property.
Sincerely,
?C
1-1
e Page 1
Gardner, John M.
RECEIVED
OCT 0 9 2001
Community Development
JOHN & GREER GARDNER
5723 Wildridge Road East
Avon, Colorado 81620
MailingAddress:
P.O.Box 3026
Vail, Colorado 81658
October 6, 200.1
Avon Planning and Zoning Commission
P.O. Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Attn: Recording Secretary
Re: Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
Enclosed please find a copy of our letter of August 4, 2000, regarding the A vo?
Community Development Department's application for duplex development of the above lot. As
indicated, our home is directly across the street from the subject lot, and we strongly object to the
proposed downgrade of zoning. We are also enclosing copies of the other letters from property
owners submitted last year.
When this matter came before the Council a year ago, the Town Attorney
indicated to the Town Council that it was his opinion that the change was permitted - - even required
- by the doctrine of "equitable estoppel. " We disagree with this conclusion. As explained by Mr.
Levin, in order to assert this doctrine, one must have been ignorant of the true facts and must have
reasonably relied on the mistaken information provided by the government entity against which the
doctrine is being asserted.
First, it is not apparent that the owner of the lot, Ms. Leeds, is even asserting
this doctrine. In fact, Mr. Levin's memo of August 16, 2000, indicates that the "owner has not
threatened to sue the Town to conform the zoning of her lot to duplex .... " If this is the case, why
is the Town's Community Development Department - - against the recommendations of the PAZ
Commission - - again making this application ? In the year that has elapsed, the subject lot has
been offered for sale at a price of at least $315,000. We personally know two separate parties who
were very interested in the lot, but would not pay that exorbitant price. If Ms. Leeds now claims
she has been injured by the Town's actions, she has not met the strict requirements of equity that
she first take all possible actions to minimize her claimed losses.
Second and most important, it is clear that Ms. Leeds did not reasonably rel
on the Town's misinformation. She bought the lot with an approved plan for a single-family house
Should she not have asked the seller - - a developer - - why he had planned and obtained approval
for this development of the lot, rather than a duplex? If this aspect of her purchase was so
important to her, should she not have covered this very important feature of the lot in her purchase
contract ? When she purchased the lot, should she not have reviewed the Wildridge Protective
Covenants, which she surely received from the title company and which clearly show this lot as a
single-family lot ? Is that not the very reason we have title insurance ? Is that not the reason that, in
our modern society, zoning decisions and protective covenants are recorded - - so that anyone can
determine the status? Should Ms. Leeds be excused from having constructive, legal notice of the
zoning of the subject lot because she was not diligent enough to check for herself ? In short, Ms.
Leeds' imprudence leaves her unable to legally assert the doctrine of equitable estoppels
C7
Beyond those facts, however, the real question to us is why the Town
Community Development Department - - which is given the duty of overseeing development of
properties in the Town and assuring that development is in the best interests of the Town and ALL of
its citizens - - including all of the property owners in the immediate vicinity of the subject lot - -
feels compelled to make this application, to downgrade zoning and encourage the development of
larger buildings and higher density ? It seems clear that Ms Leeds sole reason to build a duplex is
to make a higher profit - - just as her aggressive sales price for the lot during the last year
demonstrates This is not a question of "fairness"at all, but a matter of greed. And when it comes
to fairness, we also object to the fact that no sign indicating the application was being made and a
hearing being held was ever posted on the lot itself - - is this not Town policy ? Was the Town trying
to hide this application from public scrutiny ?
For a# of these reasons, we hope that the Planning & Zoning Commission and
the Town Council - - our elected representatives - - will deny this request.
Sincere/
4::??
John M. Gardner
Greer S. Gardner
P.S. In reviewing the materials made available atthe hearing held on this matter last year, it
appears that the Town records are not very reliable with respect to other lots, as well. Lot 15, Block
4 is listed as a duplex - - whereas the Protective Covenants show it, too, as a single-family lot.
JOHN & GREER GAnNER
5723 Wildridge Road East
Avon, Colorado 81620
P.O. Box 3026
Vail, Colorado 81658
August 4, 2000
Avon Planning & Zoning Commission
PO Box 973
Avon, Colorado 81620
Attn: Recording Secretary
Re: Lot 12, Block 49 Wildridge Subdlvistoa
With respect to the Avon Community Development Department's application for
duplex development of the above-referenced property, we wish to express our dw g,¢jgrtio s
to such development. Our residence is directly across Wildridge Road from the subject o and
designated duplex
a single family structure, even though our lot(Lot
su82, Block 4) was ch development.
is large enough (1.3 acres) to easily accommodate
The downgrade of zoning to duplex residential for Lot 12, Block 4, would not be
consistent with other development from our property to the west, on both sides of Wildridge
Road. Duplex development would also severely decrease our property value.
Looking at how Wildridge has been developed, we think it should be obvious that
some duplex designs are not very successful for their lots. As Wildridge is built out, it is our
hope that many of the duplex lots, like ours, will be developed as single family. Certainly, from
a Community Development perspective, duplex development should not be officially encouraged
by the Town, and downgrading of zoning should not be permitted.
Sincerely,
Jo M. Gardner
4? t
Greer S. Gardner
Russell & Margaret Stuut
5717A Wildridge Road East
Avon, Colorado 81620
MAILING DRESS
5931 Egypt Valley
Belmont Ml 49306
August 10, 2000
Avon Planning & Zoning Commission
PO Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
Attn: Recording Secretary
Re: Lot 12, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision
We wish to express our strong obiections with respect to the Avon Community
Development Departments application for duplex development of the above-referenced
property.
Our property is southeast and directly across Wildridge Road from the subject lot.
Although we own a duplex careful consideration was given at the time of purchase as to
the number of single-family homes and zoned single-family tots around our property. We
did this because we believe it is the single-family homes that add the most value to
properties in the area. We realized then, as we do now, that Wildridge Is an area with
some toss than quality duplexes. Indeed, one or two are eyesores and others do not
work well on their lots. We believe that the downgrading of zoning of the subject lot will
decrease our property value and should not be permitted.
We understand that there is always the possibility of any property owner applying for
variance of zoning. The Town, however, should not officially encourage the downgrading
v
of zoning.
August 4, 2000 0
Town of Avon
Planning and Zoning Commission's Recording Secretary
P.O. Box 975
Dear P&Z Commissioners,
We are writing to oppose the amendment to the Wildridge PUD concerning Lot 12,
Block 4. We believe the property should remain a single-family lot for the following
reasons:
• There is already a mix of single family and duplex lots. In this case we believe the
topography and current density argues best for a single family as currently
designated.
• Crowding duplexes onto more lots creates twice the vehicle traffic and human
congestion distracting from the potential ambiance and character of Wildridge.
• While we understand there are improvements scheduled for Nottingham Road, there
are presently none for Metcalf Road or Wildridge Road. Consider infrastructure
improvements first! Set a precedent for the region.
• There are no plans to separate Metcalf commercial traffic from Wildridge residential
traffic; it is already congested at times and Wildridge is only 60% built out.
• Property values are affected when density increases; the area becomes less attractive
to potential buyers and existing residents.
• With the remaining supply of lots in Wildridge we believe the efforts of the P&Z
should be to enhance the subdivision, not increase its already high density. You
should consider the desires of existing residents who have invested in the future of
Avon.
• If the Town of Avon changes zoning on a residential property a precedent is set for
individuals who want to change zoning, something not always in the best interest of
Avon or existing property owners.
As residents we depend upon the P&Z to make thoughtful and strategic decisions
regarding architectural standards and requests for changes in density. Please make your
decisions based upon the long-term vision of Avon and the needs of current residents.
Consider quality enhancements when considering requests for change, not how to place
more duplexes in a subdivision with limited access. Look for ways to decrease density,
widen roads, encourage tree and vegetation planting, and increase open space.
Thank you for your consideration.
Lyn and Jo a Morgan
5735 Wildridge Road East
H) 949-4436
e1Zi/141.4!71019 IU:44 71U04L,1U714 wsiuiru_u
14 August 2000
john and Donis McDonald
5730 Wildridge Rd. E.
Avon, 00 81620
Town of Avon, Planning and Zoning Commission
PO Box 975
Avon, CO 91620
Attn: R+eomding Secretary
Dear Commisawners;
We strongly object to the rezoning ofLot 12 Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision from
single fan Ay to duplex residaatiat.
This section of Wildridge was planned originally to be mostly single farnilY lots.
Lets 8 through 14 are now zoned or constructed by ownen as sin& Amly homes.
Several other lots on the downhill side of Wildridge, altbough zoned duplm have been
bulk as single family homes to increase their value and livability.
If you have not had the opportunity recently, please drive along this section of
Wildridge before you comsidet immasing the house density and devafiting the atmosphere
and present value of the existing honor.
is You will notice also that the topography of Lot 12 is particularly challenging. It
will require additional study and engineering to insure safe successful development. One
residence would be much more homogeneous to the site, neighborhood and subdivision.
Any increase in residential density would be directly counter productive to the
recent effort of the city to control vcWcJc flow and speed limits within the subdiviim
Water, police security and fire protection resources would be further deleted. Especially at
the highest elevation of a neighborhood with only one access meld.
Please deny the change of zoning for Lot 12 and maintain the ambiv= of this
section of Mrildridge as it has been developed.
Respectfully,
devfYj
G
, i
John McDonald
Donnis McDonald
Lot JO B14
cc: Ruth 0. Horne
1 - J-1 ?Mb 8: 1 1 PM
N_ 1
FAX TRAM SMIS Sly. _ l
Marvin B. Si.
FAX NO: 1222 DATE: August]
TO: Town of Avon
SENDER: Marvin Simon
NUMBER OF PAGES: COVER SM
1. _ This lot is zoned Single Family by
2. Lots purchased nearby, including
zoned Single Fly.
3. An increase in the zoning would pry
able to build 2 units is greater than the
!on
2000 FAX PHONE: 970-949-9139
ATTN: Community Development
SMECT: Lot 12, Blk 4, Wddridge
+ P = 1 PAGES.
original developer. Benchmark Properties.
were valued somewhat higher because the subject lot was
the owner with an unjust enrichment since the value of being
fiction of building 1 unit.
4. Approval of this application would establish the precedent for requests to increase the density of of ,,.r
lots, The Avon Town Council is on record as being concerned of the high density in Wildridge, l was
required to provide a certified traffic study for my 4 bedroom home.
S. Many of the homes built at the top of Wildridge are single family horses. An approval of this
application would insert 2 units on a single property surrounded by single family homes. Thereby
adversely affecting the value of the single family homes and the neighborhood.
b. It should be a concern to the Town and this Commission to avoid increasing the density in Wildridge
and to encourage voluntary downzoning. and absolutely ban any increase in zoning,. There are owners of
multiple zoned properties in the Town of Avon who could use this precedent to demand increased density
zoning for their properties.
This property is not suitable for 2 units, and may not really be suitable for a single unit since it is subject
to very heavy snowfall, deep snow accumulations and snow avalanches,
_ We encourage the Commission to ignore the conflict established by the ownership of this property and
reject this application as they certainly would from any other owner.
Thank you.
Marvin B. Simon
Patty Simon
C0NFWYWFL4LrrY.F4V JCS
s fae WWt bAnMn&tCn txht UM infMmetim b M,6iag !u W. wades thri may be CtaN700MAL AND LEGA113 JWVUAW&0. lUs Wbrrmutoo Is I>xMuW,
the C'a'n tP whom it is dituelrtl tut indwrGtd ubnK: It yw arc =A tbQ inkm&l recipWnt. any disclaaa'e, c%) iag. dirtribmion, cc use of" iabet miian otma4nod ii
gus trmsm" 6 strictly prohibited. If you brw nwei"d this t wumis4an in cam, plwe eaU us oolleot ai ()09) 377-21170 to mrraroc Ibr tho mum to us at ota nxTs
Memo
To:
Thru:
From:
Date:
Re:
E
Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Bill Efting, Town Manager
Norm Wood, Town Engineer 2?
November 7, 2001
The Village (at Avon) Filing 1 - Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements
Agreement / Resolution No. 01-33, Series of 2001
Summary: Traer Creek LLC has submitted a Final Plat and related Subdivision
Improvements Agreement (SIA) for The Village (at Avon) Filing 1. Traer Creek
Metropolitan District will be a party to the SIA in addition to Traer Creek LLC. The Final
Plat is in conformance with the Preliminary Plan that was previously approved by
Resolution No. 01-09, Series of 2001. The Subdivision Improvements Agreement
provides for construction of the public improvements required to serve the proposed
subdivision and for the provision of securities to assure completion of the improvements.
The SIA also establishes guidelines for quality control, release of securities as construction
is completed and establishes the warranty period for the completed improvements.
The public improvements will be constructed by two different entities. The majority of
the improvements including streets, roads, water, sewer and storm drainage facilities will
be constructed by Traer Creek Metropolitan District. The security for the completion of
these improvements will in the form of a District Fund in an amount of not less than
$14,336,393 and established solely for this purpose. This fund is established by
"Resolution of Traer Creek Metropolitan District Regarding Appropriation of Funds
Under Subdivision Improvements Agreement" (Exhibit E) to the Subdivision
Improvements Agreement. Construction of the remaining utilities including, gas, electric,
telephone and cable TV is the responsibility of Traer Creek LLC. The security for
completion of this portion of the improvements shall be in the form of an irrevocable letter
of credit or other collateral acceptable to the Town in an amount of not less than
$904,516.00 (110% of the estimated cost of the improvements).
n
IAEngineering\Avon Village\Final Plat\Permits & Approvals\Res 01-33 Final Plat MemO.Doc
The proposed Final Plat and SIA are in conformance with the Annexation and
Development Agreement as Amended by the First Amendment to the Annexation and
Development Agreement. The First Amendment to the Annexation and Development
Agreement would be approved by adoption of Ordinance No. 01-16. This is scheduled for
Second Reading and Public Hearing at the November 13, 2001 Town Council Meeting.
Approval of this Final Plat and SIA is recommended following approval of Ordinance No.
01-16.
Recommendations: Approve Resolution No. 01-33, Series of 2001, A
Resolution Approving Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement for The
Village (at Avon) Filing 1, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado.
Alternatives: If Ordinance No. 01-16, Series of 2001 is not approved on
Second Reading, table action on Resolution No. 01-33, Series of 2001 pending approval
of an Amendment to the Annexation and Development Agreement for The Village (at
Avon).
Proposed Motion: I move to approve Resolution No. 01-33, Series of 2001, A
Resolution Approving Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement for The
Village (at Avon) Filing 1, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado.
E
Town Manager Comments:
l:\Engineering\Avon VillageTinal PlatTermits & Approvals\Res 01-33 Final Plat MemO.Doc 2
TOWN OF AVON
RESOLUTION NO. 01-33
Series of 2001
A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT AND
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT FOR
THE VILLAGE (at Avon) FILING 1, TOWN OF
AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
WHEREAS, Traer Creek LLC, the owner of the applicable portion of The Village
(at Avon) has filed a Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement for The Village
(at Avon) Filing 1, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado for approval in accordance
with Chapter 16.20 of the Avon Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, on June 12, 2001, the Town held a public hearing at which it
received evidence and testimony concerning the Preliminary Plan for The Village (at
Avon) Filing 1, at the conclusion of which the Town Council considered such evidence
and testimony and approved the Preliminary Plan by adoption of Resolution 01-09; and
WHEREAS, the Final Plat is in general conformance with the Preliminary Plan as
approved by Resolution No. 01-09; and
WHEREAS, the Final Plat is subject to the terms and conditions of the
Annexation and Development Agreement dated October 13, 1998 and any amendments
or modifications thereto; and
WHEREAS, the Final Plat is subject to the terms and conditions of the P.U.D.
Development / Sketch Plan dated October 13, 1998 and any amendments or
modifications thereto; and
WHEREAS, the Subdivision Improvements Agreement and associated public
improvement plans include the McGrady Acres Subdivision improvements as addressed
in the Annexation, Development and Subdivision Improvements Agreement for McGrady
Acres Annexation as approved by Town of Avon Ordinance No. 01-15, Series of 2001;
and
WHEREAS, the attached Subdivision Improvements Agreement provides for the
construction of the public improvements required for development of The Village (at
Avon) Filing 1 Subdivision and the securities to assure completion of the public
improvements as required by Section 16.24.100 of the Avon Municipal Code.
Ll
L\Engineering?Avon VillageTinal Plaffermits & Approvals\Res 01-33 Final Plat.Doc
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, that the Town hereby finds and determines that the
Final Plat and Subdivision Improvements Agreement for The Village (at Avon) Filing 1 is
in general conformance with the Preliminary Plan as approved by Town of Avon
Resolution No. 01-09 and other applicable development laws, regulations and policies of
the Town of Avon and hereby approves the same subject to completion of technical
corrections as identified by Town Staff and the submission to and acceptance by, the
Town of Avon, of the following items prior to recording of the Final Plat and Subdivision
Improvements Agreement:
A. Copy of "Resolution of Traer Creek Metropolitan District Regarding Appropriation
of Funds Under Subdivision Improvements Agreement" as duly adopted and executed
by District Board of Directors (Subdivision Improvements Agreement Exhibit E); and
B. Irrevocable Letter of Credit or other acceptable security in an amount of not less
than $904,516.00 to assure completion of Subdivider public improvements; and
C. Construction plans, specifications and related documents for construction of
public improvements as identified in Subdivision Improvements Agreement Exhibits A
and B; and
D. Copies of all necessary licenses, permits and approvals from the Union Pacific
Railroad and Colorado Public Utilities Commission as required for the construction of the
Post Boulevard separated grade crossing and all utility and storm drainage crossings;
and
E. Copies of Eagle County permits and approvals as required for construction of the
Nottingham Gulch storm drainage discharge into the Eagle River; and
F. Access Permit from the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for the
Post Boulevard / US Highway 6 Intersection and Roundabout.
ADOPTED THIS DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001.
TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash
Town Clerk
E
L•\Engineering\Avon Village\Final PlatTermits & Approvals\Res 01-33 Final Plat.Doc 2
C7
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this _ day of , 2001, is by and
among Traer Creek LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Subdivider"), Traer Creek
Metropolitan District, a quasi-municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of
Colorado (the "District"), and the Town of Avon, a Colorado municipality, by and through its
Council (the "Town").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Subdivider and the District, in connection with the approval of the final plat
for The Village (at Avon) Filing 1, consisting of 176.90 acres in Section 12, T. 5 S., R. 82 W.
and Sections 7 and 8, T. 5 S., R. 81 W., of the 6th P.M., Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
(the "Subdivision"), desire to enter into a Subdivision Improvements Agreement with the Town
as provided for by Section 16.24. 100 of the Avon Municipal Code, as amended (the "Code");
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Code, the Town desires to make reasonable provisions for
completion of certain public improvements (the "Improvements") set forth in Exhibits A and B
attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the District is responsible for the performance and completion of public
improvements ("District Improvements") assigned on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference; and the Subdivider is responsible for the performance and completion of
public improvements ("Subdivider Improvements") assigned on Exhibit B attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference; and collectively referred to as Improvements.
AGREEMENT
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the following mutual covenants, conditions
and promises, the parties hereby agree as follows:
1. Final Plat Approval. The Town agrees that upon compliance with all other
conditions of approval, and subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Final Plat
of The Village (at Avon) Filing 1 shall be promptly filed for record with the Office of the Eagle
County Clerk and Recorder.
2. Completion of Work.
(a) Performance. Subdivider and District agree to furnish all equipment, labor
and material necessary to perform and complete, in a good and workmanlike manner, all
improvements and work incidental thereto assigned to each as set forth in Exhibits A and B.
Subdivider and the District further agree that each will be responsible for all costs of
929/Traer
Improvements assigned to it. All said work shall be performed in accordance with the
construction plans and specifications as submitted to and approved by the Town prior to
commencement of construction of Improvements. All Improvements shall be completed within
three (3) years of the date of the Town's approval of the Final Plat for the Subdivision.
(b) Inspection Procedures.
(1) All work shall be done under the inspection procedures and
standards established by the Town, shall be subject to the reasonable satisfaction of the Town
and shall not be deemed complete until the reasonable approval and acceptance of the
Improvements by the Town.
(2) Designation of Inspectors. Prior to commencement of construction
work on the Improvements, the Town shall designate the individuals or independent third parties
employed by the Town who are authorized to inspect the construction of the Improvements.
Such inspections by the Town shall not relieve Subdivider or the District or their agents from any
responsibility or obligation to assure that all work is completed in conformance with all
standards, plans and specifications as submitted to and previously approved by the Town.
(3) Cost of Inspections. The cost of such inspections, whether by
Town employees or an independent third party inspector, shall be paid by Subdivider or the
District, depending on the party responsible for the Improvement inspected, and subject to the
limitations set forth in paragraph 9 below.
(4) Notice of Non-Compliance. In the event that the Town, through
the inspectors, reasonably determines that the Improvements are not in compliance with the pre-
approved construction plans and specifications, it shall give written notice of such non-
compliance to Subdivider or the District, depending on the Improvements involved ("Notice of
Non-Compliance"). The Notice of Non-Compliance shall include a narrative describing the
unsatisfactory construction work with specific reference to the applicable construction plans and
specifications. The Notice of Non-Compliance must be provided to Subdivider or the District
within two (2) working days of the date of the inspection.
3. Security for Completion of Improvements.
(a) Security. To secure completion of the Improvements, Subdivider and the
District hereby agree to secure their respective obligations under this Agreement with Collateral
in accordance with Section 16.24. 100 of the Code. Collateral shall be one or a combination of
the following: cash or its equivalent; securities of acceptable value; letter of credit; bond (for
District Improvements warranty period only); and land of acceptable value by deed of trust.
(b) Substitution of Security. Either Subdivider or the District may substitute
another form of collateral acceptable to the Town in place of the forms of security set forth below
929/Traer -2- 0
in order to guaranty the faithful completion of the Improvements and the performance of the
terms of this Agreement.
4. District Improvements.
(a) Funding Resolution. The District has adopted a resolution (the "Funding
Resolution") attached hereto as Exhibit E authorizing the District's execution of this Agreement
and providing for the appropriation, segregation and use of funds in an amount sufficient to
guarantee the construction of the District Improvements set forth on Exhibit A. The estimated
costs of completion of the District Improvements are set forth on Exhibit C attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
The Funding Resolution specifically provides that all funds referenced therein are
unencumbered and free from claims of others such that, if necessary, any requests for payment
approved by the Town may be promptly honored. As a condition to recordation of the Final Plat,
the District shall provide the Town Engineer with evidence that such funds have been
appropriated and segregated in a separate account (the "Security Account") and identified for use
in connection with this Agreement. The District shall renew the Funding Resolution at the
beginning of each subsequent calendar year until all District Improvements have received final
acceptance or until the District provides substitute collateral acceptable to the Town.
(b) Security for Interstate 70 Interchange. The parties acknowledge that the
Town and Subdivider's predecessors-in-interest entered into an Annexation and Development
Agreement ("Development Agreement") dated October 13, 1998, and a First Amendment to the
Annexation and Development Agreement ("First Amendment") that among other things,
addressed the construction of a full diamond interchange on Interstate 70 serving the
Subdivision. Paragraph 4.30) in the Development Agreement, and reiterated in paragraph 2(q) of
the First Amendment, states that if the District provides the Colorado Department of
Transportation ("CDOT") with a completion bond or other security acceptable to CDOT with
respect to completion of the Interstate 70 interchange, then the District shall have no obligation
to also provide separate security to the Town for such improvements. The Town, Subdivider and
the District agree that nothing in this Agreement shall alter or modify the terms of the
Development Agreement or the First Amendment.
(c) Progress Payments on District Improvements. The District may make
progress payments to its contractors from the Security Account on a monthly basis upon the
partial completion of itemized improvements which have been set forth in Exhibit C and upon
fifteen (15) day's prior written notice including an itemized statement of the District to the Town.
The District shall retain ten percent (10%) of the amount of each payment until final completion
and acceptance of all work covered by each construction contract; provided however, when the
value of work completed has progressed to fifty percent (50%) of the contract amount, the
District shall not be required to withhold additional retainage for the remainder of the work
under such contract. The (10 %) ten percent retainage of the value of work completed may be
929rrraer -3-
reinstated if in the Town's opinion the lack of progress or other substantial reasons exist. Except
for the foregoing, in no event shall any progress payment cause the remaining sum to be available
in the Security Account for subsequent disbursements to be less than one hundred ten percent
(110%) of the costs to complete all remaining District Improvements as estimated at the time of
each progress payment. Upon completion of all work related to the District Improvements, the
Town's acceptance of the District Improvements and the expiration of the Warranty Period set
forth in paragraph 6 below, the Town shall release any further interest in the Security Account.
(d) Default by District. In the event of a default in whole or in part by the
District, the Town shall be authorized to access the funds in the Security Account for the purpose
of undertaking completion or remediation work on the District's Improvements after providing
thirty (30) days advance notice of default and providing an opportunity during such period for the
District to cure the default. The Town shall be entitled to draw on the Security Account by
Resolution of the Town Council stating (i) that the District is in default, and (ii) the funds are
required in order to complete or correct work on the District's Improvements. District funds
identified in the Funding Resolution shall be held, whether by the District or the Town, in
compliance with the requirements of C.R.S. 29-1-803(1) for the purpose of providing for the
completion of the District Improvements.
Subdivider Improvements.
(a) Security for Completion of Subdivider's Improvements. Subdivider shall
deliver to the Town an irrevocable letter of credit or other collateral consistent with Section
16.24. 100 of the Code issued by a reputable financial institution in an amount equal to one
hundred and ten percent (110%) of the estimated costs of completion of Subdivider's
Improvements as set forth on Exhibit D. The irrevocable letter of credit or other collateral shall
be delivered to the Town prior to, or concurrently with, recordation of the Final Plat for the
Subdivision.
(b) Progress Payments on Subdivider's Improvements. The Subdivider may
make progress payments to its contractors on a monthly basis upon (i) the partial completion of
itemized improvements for which cost estimates have been set forth in Exhibit D and upon
written request including an itemized statement of the Subdivider to the Town, and (ii) the
written approval of the Town or its designee; provided, however, if the Town fails to respond to
a disbursement request within twenty (20) days such request will be deemed approved. Upon the
approval of such progress payments, the amount of collateral shall be reduced by the amount of
such payment; provided, however, that in no event will any such reduction cause the amount of
remaining collateral to be less than an amount equal to one hundred and ten percent (110%) of
the estimated costs of completion of all remaining Subdivider's Improvements. Upon
completion of all work related to Subdivider's Improvements and the Town's acceptance of
Subdivider's Improvements, the entire amount of remaining collateral less those amounts
described in paragraph 6 below, shall be released.
929/Traer -4- 0
(c) Default by Subdivider. In the event of a default in whole or in part by
Subdivider, the Town shall be authorized to draw on the letter of credit or other collateral for the
purpose of undertaking completion or remediation work on the Subdivider's Improvements after
providing thirty (30) days' advance written notice of default and providing an opportunity during
such period for Subdivider to cure the default. The Town shall be entitled to draw on such letter
of credit or other collateral by Resolution of the Town Council stating (i) that Subdivider is in
default, and (ii) the funds are required in order to complete or correct work on the Subdivider's
Improvements.
6. Warranty Period. The Improvements shall be warranted to be free from defects in
workmanship or quality for a period of one (1) year after acceptance of all the work by the Town.
In the event of any such defect, the Town may require Subdivider or the District, depending on
which work is defective, to correct the defect in material or workmanship. The amounts for
completion of all warranty work on District Improvements shall be secured by a letter of credit,
bond or other acceptable collateral in the amount of one hundred and ten percent (110%) of the
cost of such corrective work to be held by the Town during such one (1) year period, as a
guaranty of performance of any work required under the above-described warranty. The amounts
for completion of all warranty work on Subdivider Improvements shall be secured by a letter of
credit or other acceptable collateral in the amount of one hundred and ten percent (110%) of the
cost of such corrective work to be held by the Town during such one (1) year period, as a
guaranty of performance of any work required under the above-described warranty. In the event
any corrective work is performed during the one (1) year warranty period then the warranty on
0 said corrected work shall be extended for one (1) year from the date on which it is completed.
C
7. Condition of Public Dedicated Roadways. The District shall at all times prior to
acceptance of any publicly dedicated roadways within the Subdivision by the Town give good
and adequate warning to the traveling public of each and every known dangerous condition
existent in said roads and shall protect the traveling public from such defective or dangerous
conditions. Until the completion of all the Improvements herein agreed to be constructed, roads
not accepted as improved shall be under the charge and control of the District for purposes of this
Agreement; and the District may close all or a portion of any street or road within the
Subdivision whenever it is necessary to protect the traveling public during the construction or
installation of the Improvements herein agreed to be made.
8. En ing eering Certification. Upon completion of portions of the Improvements,
Subdivider or the District will cause their engineers (who shall be registered in the State of
Colorado) to certify in writing that the installation of the Improvements, or portions thereof as
may be completed from time to time, have been completed in conformance with all standards,
plans and specifications as submitted to and previously approved by the Town. Inspection
reports, test results and other supporting documentation shall be submitted with the certification.
9. Subdivision and Inspection Fees. Fees in accordance with the Town's
Subdivision Regulations for the review of Preliminary Plans and Final Plats have been paid in
929/Traer
-5-
full. Additional fees shall be paid to the Town by Subdivider or the District, depending on which
improvements are involved, within thirty (30) days after delivery of written invoice for such fees
to cover the cost of inspections by the Town. The fees will be based on direct (out-of-pocket)
costs of the Town plus an administrative fee in the amount of fifteen (15%) percent of the direct
costs, but in no event will the total amount of such additional fees exceed five percent (5%) of
construction costs.
10. No Obligation of Town to Complete Improvements. Subdivider and the District
agree that in the event either shall fail to perform their obligations as set forth herein, the Town
shall be under no obligation to complete or perform any of the said Improvements. No one,
individually or otherwise, other than the parties hereto, shall acquire, as a result of this
Agreement, any rights, claims or obligations from or against the Town, its agents, employees or
officers. Actions by the Town against Subdivider or the District to enforce any provision of this
Agreement shall be at the sole discretion of the Town. No third parties shall have any rights to
require any action by the Town pursuant to this Agreement; and this Agreement shall not create a
liability on the part of or be a cause of action against the Town, for any personal or property
damage that may result to any third parties from the failure of the Subdivider or the District to
complete the Improvements herein specified.
11. Non-Liability of Town: Indemnification. The Town shall not, nor shall any
officer, agent, or employee thereof, be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage
related to the work specified in this Agreement, nor shall the Town, nor any officer, agent or
employee thereof, be liable for any persons or property injured by reason of the nature of said
work. To the extent permitted by law, Subdivider and the District, respectively, hereby agree to
indemnify and hold harmless the Town, and any of its officers, agents and employees against any
losses, claims, damages or liabilities to which the Town or any of its officers, agents or
employees may become subject, because of any losses, claims, damages or liabilities (or actions
in respect thereof) that arise out of, or are based upon, any acts or omissions in the performance
of the obligations of Subdivider or the District, respectively, as hereinbefore stated. Furthermore,
Subdivider and the District shall reimburse the Town for any and all legal or other expenses
reasonably incurred by the Town in connection with investigating or defending any such loss or
claim.
12. Rights of Town in Event of Default. In the event that Subdivider or the District
default in whole or in part in the performance of this Agreement, and after the expiration of thirty
(30) days after having given written notice to Subdivider and the District of such default during
which period of time the Subdivider or the District failed to correct said default, the Town may,
at its sole discretion, proceed with the construction or completion of the Improvements specified
on Exhibit A or Exhibit B. All such costs paid by the Town for such Improvements, together
with all costs of personnel, equipment and other matters expended by the Town in furtherance of
the construction responsibilities of Subdivider or the District, shall be paid by Subdivider or the
District based upon their underlying responsibility for the improvement in question. Any such
costs relating to the Subdivider Improvements, which have not been reimbursed by Subdivider,
929/Traer -6- 0
shall be a lien on any property in the Subdivision owned by Subdivider at the time of default.
Any such costs relating to the District's Improvements, which have not been reimbursed by the
District, shall be a lien on any property in the Subdivision owned by Subdivider at the time of
default. Said lien may be foreclosed in the same manner as a mortgage and shall entitle the
Town to add its costs and reasonable attorneys' fees in such foreclosure or other collection.
Without limiting the foregoing, the Town may bring a mandatory injunction action against
Subdivider or the District to require installation and construction of the Improvements, if not
constructed within the time limits described in this Agreement. If any such action is brought by
the Town, the Town shall be awarded its court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.
13. Letter Certifying Completion and Final Acceptance of Improvements. When all
Improvements have been completed and accepted by the Town, and the Warranty Period has
expired, the Town agrees that it will issue a letter, in recordable form, certifying that all
obligations of Subdivider and the District under this Agreement have been satisfied.
14. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended from time to time, provided that
such amendment is in writing and signed by all parties hereto.
15. Covenants Running, with the Land. This Agreement and the obligations hereof
shall be deemed to be covenants running with the land and shall be binding on the successors and
assigns of the parties hereto.
0 The parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written.
TOWN OF AVON, a Colorado
municipal corporation
ATTEST:
By:
Town Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Town Attorney
Mayor
-7-
929/Traer
TRAER CREEK LLC, a Colorado limited liability
company
By:
Magnus Lindholm
Manager
TRAER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT, a
quasi - municipal corporation
By:
William J. Post
President
0
E
929/Traer -$
Exibit A
DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS
C7
1. Demolition, Excavation & Grading
A. Remove & Dispose of Existing Structures
B. Excavation for Roadways & Overlot Grading
C. Embankment Including Structural and Stockpile Fill
11. Incidental Construction
A. Erosion & Pollution Control
B. Dust Control
C. Revegetation
III. Storm Drainage
A. Nottingham Gulch to Eagle River
B. Nottingham Gulch Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities (1-70)
C. Roadway and Site Drainage Facilities to Eagle River
D. Stormwater & Pollution Control Facilities
IV. Ut
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
ilities
Water
Sanitary Sewer
Natural Gas
Electric (Pro-Rata 24% of Private)
Telephone
Cable TV
V. Bridges and Structures
A. Eagle River Bridge
B. Union Pacific Railroad Bridge
C. Retaining Walls
VI. Street Improvements Including Fine Grading, Sub-Base
Materials & Preparation, Concrete Curb & Gutter,
Medians,Crosspans & Sidewalks, Asphalt Paving, and
Signage & Striping
A. US Highway 6
B. Post Boulevard (US Hwy 6 to South 1-70 Access Line)
C. Eaglebend Drive
D. Nottingham Ranch Road
E. Yoder Avenue
F. Fawcett Road
G. East Beaver Creek Boulevard/Chapel Place (Temporary Connection)
VII. Street Landscaping
VIII Street Lighting
0 IX Management and General Conditions
Exibit B
SUBDIVIDER IMPROVEMENTS
Dry Utilities
B. Gas
C. Electric
D. Telephone/Communications
II Construction Management and General Conditions
0
E
Exibit C
0
•
ESTIMATED COST OF COMPLETION
for
DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS
1. Demolition, Excavation & Grading
A. Remove & Dispose of Existing Structures $ 205,841
B. Excavation for Roadways & Overlot Grading $ 2,301,772
C. Embankment Including Structural and Stockpile Fill 2 $ -
11. Incidental Construction
A. Erosion & Pollution Control $ 85,953
B. Dust Control $ 193,200
C. Revegetation $ 37,450
III. Storm Drainage
A. Nottingham Gulch to Eagle River $ 613,765
B. Nottingham Gulch Debris Flow Mitigation Facilities (1-70) ' $ 60,000
C. Roadway and Site Drainage Facilities to Eagle River $ 1,832,682
D. Stormwater & Pollution Control Facilities $ 10,000
IV. Utilities
A. Water $ 1,025,397
B. Sanitary Sewer $ 249,742
C. Natural Gas
D. Electric (Pro-Rata 24% of Private) $ 103,669
E. Telephone $ -
F. Cable TV $ 40,624
V. Bridges and Structures
A. Eagle River Bridge $ 1,738,066
B. Union Pacific Railroad Bridge $ 673,176
C. Retaining Walls $ 893,253
VI. Street Improvements Including Fine Grading, Sub-Base
Materials & Preparation, Concrete Curb & Gutter,
Medians, Crosspans & Sidewalks, Asphalt Paving, and
Signage & Striping
A. US Highway 6 $ 232,356
B. Post Boulevard (US Hwy 6 to South 1-70 Access Line) $ 1,132,766
C. Eaglebend Drive $ 16,703
D. Nottingham Ranch Road $ 32,737
E. Yoder Avenue $ 343,010
F. Fawcett Road $ 192,943
G. East Beaver Creek Boulevard/Chapel Place (Temporary Connection) $ 320,542
VII. Street Landscaping $ 814,620
VIII Street Lighting $ 98,000
IX Management and General Conditions $ 1,088,126
0 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 14,336,393
1 Upon completion of 1-70 Security agreements w/ CDoT amount will be released.
2 Embankment is in included in Item No. 1 B above.
Exibit D
ESTIMATED COST OF COMPLETION
for
SUBDIVIDER IMPROVEMENTS
I Dry Utilities
B. Gas $ 127,862
C. Electric $ 328,285
D. Telephone/Communications $ 303,458
II Construction Management and General Conditions $ 62,351
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 821,956
E
0
11
Exhibit E
RESOLUTION
OF TRAER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT
REGARDING APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS UNDER
SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Traer Creek Metropolitan District (the "District") is a quasi-municipal
corporation and political subdivision of the State of Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the District is authorized, pursuant to Section 32-1-1001(1)(d)(I), C.R.S., to
enter into contracts and agreements affecting the affairs of the District; and
WHEREAS, the District has entered into a Subdivision Improvements Agreement dated
, 2001 (the "SIA") with the Town of Avon, Colorado (the "Town") and Traer
Creek LLC, a Colorado limited liability company ("Subdivider") regarding the funding and/or
construction of public infrastructure improvements in connection with the approval of the Final
Plat of The Village (at Avon) Filing 1, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the District is responsible for the performance and completion of public
improvements assigned on Exhibit A of the SIA (the "District Improvements");
® NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
TRAER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Board of Directors hereby finds, determines and declares that it is in the best
interest of the District to execute and deliver to the Town the SIA and the appropriate officers of
the District are hereby authorized to execute and deliver such SIA to the Town.
2. The Board of Directors hereby appropriates, reserves and allows for tender to the
Town pursuant to the SIA available funds of the District in an amount not less than
$14,336,393.00 (the "Funds") to guarantee construction of the District Improvements.
3. The Board of Directors hereby certifies to the Town Council that the Funds are
unencumbered and free from claims of others so that any requests of the Town for payment
under the SIA may be promptly honored. The Board of Directors further certifies to the Town
Council that the Funds have been set aside in a separate account and identified for the purposes
recited herein and that such Funds shall be held in compliance with the requirements of Section
29-1-803(1), C.R.S., for the purpose of providing for the completion of the District
Improvements.
4. This Resolution shall be renewed at the beginning of each subsequent calendar
year until all the District Improvements have received final acceptance or until the District
® provides substitute collateral acceptable to the Town.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2001.
TRAER CREEK METROPOLITAN DISTRICT is
William J. Post, President
Attest:
Eric E. Applegate, Secretary
LJ
W:\Clients\435 Traer Creek\Resoluti'Resolution re appropriation of funds under SIA.doc
11
• Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Bill Efting, Town Manager
From: Norm Wood, Town Engineer??V
Ruth Borne, Director Community Development
Date November 8, 2001
Re: Resolution No. 01-34, Series 2001, A Resolution Approving Preliminary
Subdivision Plan for The Village (at Avon) Filing 2, Town of Avon, Eagle
County, Colorado
Summary: Wintergreen Homes has submitted a subdivision application for
Preliminary Plan approval for "The Village (at Avon) Filing 2".
On October 16, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Preliminary
Subdivision Plan and recommended approval of The Village (at Avon) Filing 2
subdivision by adoption of attached Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution
01-17.
Copies of the Preliminary Plan were transmitted to the Eagle River Fire
Protection District and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District for review and
comment. This Resolution includes conditions of approval to address comments
and recommendations received in response to their review.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 01-34,
Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving Preliminary Subdivision Plan for The
Village (at Avon) Filing 2, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado.
Proposed Motion: I make a motion to approve Resolution No. 01-34,
Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving Preliminary Subdivision Plan for The Village
(at Avon) Filing 2, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado.
Town Manager Comments:
i i
Attachment: Resolution 01-34
Planning and Zoning Resolution 01-17
C
I Trigineering\Avon VillageTiling 2\.SubdivisionTes 01-34 Approval Memo.Doc
TOWN OF AVON
RESOLUTION NO. 01-34
SERIES OF 2001
A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY
SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE (at Avon)
FILING 2, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY,
COLORADO
WHEREAS, Wintergreen Homes, has filed a subdivision application for The
Village (at Avon) Filing 2, Preliminary Plan approval in accordance with Chapter 16.20 of
the Avon Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, The Preliminary Plan is subject to the terms and conditions of the
Annexation and Development Agreement dated October 13, 1998 and any amendments
or modifications thereto; and
WHEREAS, The Preliminary Plan is subject to the terms and conditions of the
P.U.D. Development / Sketch Plan dated October 13, 1998 and any amendments or
modifications thereto; and
WHEREAS, The Town has provided public notice in accordance with Section
16.20.070 to all owners within three hundred feet of The Village (at Avon) Filing 2 and
posted notices of the time and date at which Town Council considered the preliminary
subdivision application; and
WHEREAS, The Town held a public hearing at which it received evidence and
testimony concerning the Preliminary Plan, at the conclusion of which the Town Council
considered such evidence and testimony.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO, that the Town hereby finds and determines that the
Preliminary Plan for The Village (at Avon) Filing 2 is in the best interest of the public
health, safety and welfare and conforms to the terms of the PUD Development Plan and
other applicable development laws, regulations and policies of the Town of Avon and
hereby approves the same subject to the following conditions:
1. General Requirements - Must be Completed Prior to Final Plat Approval:
1. Emergency access and fire hydrant spacing must be approved by the
Eagle River Fire Protection District.
2. Plans for all water and sewer facilities must be approved by Eagle River
Water and Sanitation District.
IAEngineering\Avon VillageTiling 21Subdivision\Prel Plan Res 01-34.Doc
V
r
3. Complete geologic hazard reports including mitigation measures must be
submitted to and approved by the Town.
4. Drainage:
Plans for Storm Water Management and Pollution Control Facilities must
be approved by the Town of Avon.
5. Utilities:
Approval of construction plans for all utility services including but not limited
to water, sewer, electric, natural gas, phone and cable must be provided by
the appropriate entities to the Town of Avon.
6. A Subdivision Improvements Agreement must be approved by the Town
and the corresponding security must be provided to assure compliance
with the Subdivision Improvements Agreement.
ADOPTED THIS DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001.
TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
.7
11
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash
Town Clerk
IAEngineering\Avon VillageTiling 2\.SubdivisionTrel Plan Res 01-34.Doc
2
T
TOWN OF AVON
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 01-17
A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE AT
AVON, FILING 2, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY,
COLORADO
HEREAS, Traer Creek LLC has submitted a Preliminary Subdivision Plan application
W for The Village at Avon, Filing 2; and
W HEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon having
considered the applications and reviewed the plans for the Village at Avon, Filing 2;
and
N OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission
of the Town of Avon, Colorado, hereby recommends approval for:
1. The Preliminary Subdivision Plan for the Village at Avon, Filing 2, Eagle County,
Colorado.
ADOPTED THIS 16th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2001
Signed:
Chris Evans, Chair
A t.?
Date: / 6 b C. ? l
Date:
11
•
Paul Kiq?qr4eefetffy
• Memo
To. Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thu: Bill Efting, Town Manager%t-
From: Ruth Borne, Director runity Development
o
Tambi Katieb, Planne
Dade November 13, 2001
Re: Approval of Resolution 01-36 Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and
Industrial Design Review Guidelines
Summary:
On November 6th, 2001, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted the revised Town
of Avon Residential Commercial and Industrial Design Review Guidelines by
Resolution 01-19.
These guidelines were adopted after the Commission held eight public hearings on the
proposed revisions. Additionally, the Commission held a joint work session with Council
on March 21, 2001 to provide an opportunity for direction as we started this project.
As you recall, Community Development staff applied for and received a 2001 NWCCOG
technical assistance grant for $2,000 to assist staff in revising the design review
guidelines. The grant requires that the Town complete this project by December 31, 2001
and submit for reimbursement of the expenses prior to that date. We will be utilizing the
grant to cover Town costs in producing a bound version of the guidelines, and to create a
downloadable version of the guidelines from our Town website.
Discussion:
The following points summarize the `significant' revisions made to our Design
Guidelines:
• Revised the building site design standards to provide applicants with more clarity
on what is required on a site plan.
• Require pre-application meetings with staff to avoid lengthy delays in processing
from incomplete or insufficient submittals and to provide feedback regarding
design prior to significant investment by the applicant. Additionally, we now
require a sketch plan submittal prior to a final design plan submittal while still
allowing the opportunity for a `fast track' design process for certain applications.
.7
Memo to Town Council, November 13, 2001 Page 1 of 2
Re: Design Guidelines Resolution 01-36
• Incorporated both commercial and industrial design standards with our residential
standards to create a comprehensive set of guidelines for all types of projects
occurring within the Town.
• Revised the building design standards to articulate desirable design features while
at the same time allowing enough flexibility for varied, high quality design
proposals. This is particularly important as the Town anticipates redevelopment
of properties in the near future.
• Revised the application, scheduling, and processing requirements to `streamline'
the application process and thus avoid lengthy delays in construction at either the
design or the building permit phases. Also, we now include all applications and
checklists in as appendices to the guidelines.
• Require the submittal of a pollution control plan and construction staging plan at
final design to mitigate the potentially adverse affects of new construction
projects on existing neighbors.
• Require a compliance deposit in order to ensure full and binding performance to
an approved final design plan. The deposit is due at the issuance of a building
permit for a project.
• Revised and clarified access, parking, fire and engineering standards in a format
that is easily interpretable.
We will also be utilizing a portion of the grant monies to produce a downloadable version
of the guidelines from our Town website, thus offering the ability for anyone to access a
free version of the guidelines.
Conclusion:
Staff recommends that you adopt Resolution 01-36 approving the Town of Avon
Residential Commercial and Industrial Desi Review Guidelines - Procedures Rules
and Replations.
Town Manager Comments:
Exhibits:
Exhibit `A': Town of Avon Residential Commercial and Industrial Design Guidelines
-Procedures Rules and Regulations
Exhibit `B': Resolution 01-36 Council Resolution
Exhibit `C': Resolution 01-19 Planning& Zoning Resolution
11
Memo to Town Council, November 13, 2001 Page 2 of 2
Re: Design Guidelines Resolution 01-36
• TOWN OF AVON
RESOLUTION NO. 01-36
SERIES OF 2001
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TOWN OF AVON RESIDENTIAL,
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES - PROCEDURES, RULES
AND REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, Section 2.16.070 of The Avon Municipal Code establishes the Planning and
Zoning Commission for purposes of design review of the exterior design of all new
structures and property development and additions to all existing structures and property
development; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 2.16 of The Avon Municipal Code grants authority to the Planning and
Zoning Commission to enact `Design Review Guidelines' and specifically states:
The objectives of the design review function of the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall be as follows:
a. To prevent excessive or unsightly grading of property which could cause
disruption of natural watercourses or scar natural landforms;
b. To ensure that the location and configuration of structures, including signs and
signage, are visually harmonious with their sites and with surrounding sites
and structure and that there shall be conformance to the Master Plan of the
Town;
c. To ensure that the architectural design of structures and their materials and
colors are visually harmonious with the Town's overall appearance, with
surrounding development, with natural and existing landforms, and with
officially approved development plans, if any, for the areas in which the
structures are proposed to be located; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission have reviewed the attached Town of
Avon Residential Commercial and Industrial Design Review Guidelines - Procedures,
C
F:ACouncil (c)\Resolutions\2001\01-36 DRG Adoption.doc
Rules and Regulations (Exhibit A), as prepared and revised by Community Development
staff, and have approved these guidelines on Resolution 01-19 (Exhibit B) on November
6`h, 2001;
OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF AVON, that the
N Town of Avon Residential Commercial and Industrial Guidelines - Procedures Rules and
Regulations (Exhibit A) is hereby approved in order to replace and amend the existing
Planning ?and Zoning Commission Procedures Rules and Regulations as adopted January
27, 1998.
ADOPTED THIS 13`h DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001.
TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash
Town Clerk
L
11
F:\Council (c)\Resolutions\200I\01-36 DRG Adoption. doe
C7
TOWN OF AVON
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 01-19
SERIES OF 2001
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TOWN OF AVON RESIDENTIAL,
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES - PROCEDURES, RULES
AND REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, Section 2.16.070 of The Avon Municipal Code establishes the Planning and
Zoning Commission for purposes of design review of the exterior design of all new
structures and property development and additions to all existing structures and property
development; and
® Chapter 2.16 of The Avon Municipal Code grants authority to the Planning and
WEREAS,
oning Commission to enact `Design Review Guidelines' and specifically states:
The objectives of the design review function of the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall be as follows:
a. To prevent excessive or unsightly grading of property which could cause
disruption of natural watercourses or scar natural landforms;
b. To ensure that the location and configuration of structures, including signs and
signage, are visually harmonious with their sites and with surrounding sites
and structure and that there shall be conformance to the Master Plan of the
Town;
c. To ensure that the architectural design of structures and their materials and
colors are visually harmonious with the Town's overall appearance, with
surrounding development, with natural and existing landforms, and with
officially approved development plans, if any, for the areas in which the
structures are proposed to be located; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission have reviewed the attached Town of
Avon Residential, Commercial and Industrial Design Review Guidelines - Procedures,
FAPlanning & Zoning Commission\Resolutions\2001 Resolutions\OI-19 DRG Adoption.doc
Rules and Regulations (Exhibit A), as prepared and revised by Community Development
staff;
OW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission
N herebY recommends to the Town Council the approval of these Town of Avon Residential,
Commercial and Industrial Guidelines - Procedures, Rules and Regulations (Exhibit A) in
order to replace and amend the existing Planning and Zoning Commission Procedures,
Rules and Regulations as adopted January 27, 1998.
ADOPTED THIS 6th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2001
Signed:
Date:_
Chris Evans, Chair
Wj?? Date:
ecr
tPaulein,
C]
F:\Planning & Zoning Commission\Resolutions\2001 Resolutions\01-19 DRG Adoption.doc
u? a I
HEART of the VALLEY
Avo N
C O L O R A D O
TOWN OF AvON
RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, AND
INDUSTRIAL DESIGN REVIEW
GUIDELINES
PROCEDURES, RULES, AND REGULATIONS
ADOPTED NOVEMBER 6, 2001
Table of Contents
Sections
1/ Purpose and Intent Page 3
2/ Authority Page 4
3/ Definitions and Engineering Standards Page 5-9
4/ Residential Development Guidelines
A. Site Development Page 10-15
B. Building Design Page 16-18
C. Landscaping Page 19-21
D. Miscellaneous Items Page 22-23
5/ Commercial and Industrial Development Guidelines
A. Site Development Page 24-30
B. Building Design Page 31-36
'C. Landscaping Page 37-39
D. Miscellaneous Items Page 40-41
6/ Application Requirements and Processing Page 42-43
7/ Planning and Zoning Commission Review Page 44-46
8/ Miscellaneous Regulations Page 47
Appendices
1. Recommended Plant List Page 48-50
2. Town of Avon Noxious Weeds Page 51
3. Sketch Design Plan/Final Design Plan Application & Checklist Page 52-55
4. Pollution Control Plan Page 56-59
5. Stormwater Control Plan Page 60-66
6. Example Color Board Page 67-68
7. Example Site Plan Page 69
8. Fee Schedule Page 70
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 2
Adopted November 6, 2001
Ll
1
1
E
1. Purpose and Intent
Design Philosophy
The general design philosophy for the Town of Avon is to preserve and protect property values by
creating an aesthetic quality throughout the built environment of our community. The Town should
continue to be perceived as a contemporary mountain town, complementary to the natural landscape
and unbuilt environs. The Town should appear as a cohesive unit comprised of simple building forms,
subdued colors, and predominantly pitched roofs. In residential areas, the relationship between
buildings and the natural environment should be harmonized rather than dominating. Landscaping
should blend the surrounding natural environment and the home, not hide one from the other. Form,
scale, proportion, and materials should support the natural environs and reinforce those
characteristics that uniquely identify a neighborhood's built environ as it relates to the Town.
A
7
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 3
Adopted November 6, 2001
Typical Wildridge Vista : From Wildridge Road East Looking South towards Beaver Creek.
2. Authority
The authority to enact `Design Review Guidelines' is granted by Chapter 2.16 of The Avon Municipal
Code, which specifically states:
C. The objectives of the design-review function of the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall be as follows:
a. To prevent excessive or unsightly grading of property which could cause disruption
of natural watercourses or scar natural landforms;
b. To ensure that the location and configuration of structures, including signs and
signage, are visually harmonious with their sites and with surrounding sites and
structure and that there shall be conformance to the master plan of the town;
c. To ensure that the architectural design of structures and their materials and colors
are visually harmonious with the town's overall appearance, with surrounding
development, with natural and existing landforms, and with officially approved
development plans, if any, for the areas in which the structures are proposed to be
located;
d. To ensure that plans for the landscaping of property and open spaces conform with
the rules and regulations as prescribed by the Town and by this chapter and to
provide visually pleasing settings for structures on the same site and on adjoining
and nearby sites (Ord. 83-11).
Purpose and Intent
To establish procedures, rules, and regulations by which the Commission shall receive, review, and
rule on applications for the design of any proposed alterations to real property, including land and any
improvements on that land, within the Town of Avon.
Scope
The scope of these procedures for design review includes but is not limited to site grading, excavation
or fill; the location and configuration of structures on a site; the architectural design of structures
including color and materials; landscaping of sites including number, size, placement, species of
plantings and provisions for maintenance systems of same. The Commission shall review and act upon
the general design and appearance of any building, construction, paving, grading, or landscaping
proposed on any lot or parcel of land within the Town, including municipal and other government
projects. It shall be unlawful to begin any such work prior to approval by the Commission.
Compatibility
These Rules of Procedure are in accordance with Section 2.16.070 of the Avon Municipal Code, and
details the procedures for approval of development plans required by Section 17.12.020 of the Avon
Municipal Code. These Rules are intended to complement other ordinances of the Town, and shall
neither duplicate nor supersede them.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 4
Adopted November 6, 2001
3. Definitions and Engineering Standards
Access: The place, means, or way by which pedestrians and vehicles shall have adequate and usable
ingress and egress to property, use, or parking space.
Accessory Structures: An accessory structure (`building' or `use') means a subordinate building or
use which located on the same lot on which the main building or use is situated and which is
reasonably necessary and incidental to the conduct of the primary use of such building or main use.
Access Grade: The slope of a road, street, driveway, or other means of access, as measured from the
t back side of pan along the centerline of the means of access.
Annual High Water Mark: The visible line on the edge or a river, stream, lake, pond, spring or seep
0 up to which the presence and action of water are so usual and long conditions (with a recurrence
interval of one (1) year or less) so as to create a distinct character with respect to vegetation and the
nature of the soil.
Applicant: An owner or owner's representative who is authorized to represent and/or act upon any
application or submittal.
Architect: An architect licensed in the State of Colorado.
1 Architectural Projection: When an architectural projection (i.e. roof eave, cupola) physically projects
91 beyond the plane of a required limitation (i.e. height).
Best Management Practice (BMP): A structural device designed to temporarily or permanently store
or treat stormwater runoff in order to mitigate flooding, reduce pollution, and provide other amenities.
BNW's include wet ponds, created wetlands, filters, and infiltration trenches and galleries.
Berm: A mound of earth used to screen or separate one area from another to reduce visual, noise and
similar impacts of development. Berm may also mean the act of pushing earth into a mound.
Building Code: In the Town of Avon, the most recently adopted version of the Building Code shall
® apply.
Building Envelopes: That portion of a lot within which all buildings are confined. A specified area
that does not alter or otherwise affect existing setbacks or easements.
® Building Height: The distance measured vertically from the existing grade or finished grade
(whichever is more restrictive) at any given point to the top of a flat or mansard roof or the highest
' ridgeline of a sloping roof. (Ord 91-10 part 1).
M
i
aned
Building Height is always measured from the most restrictive grade, either existing or
proposed (finished) grade. All elevations must be labeled in numeric form.
i own of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 5
Adopted November 6, 2001
?EIVSciNL GINDE 8100
Building Setbacks: A line or location within a lot or site which establishes the permitted location of
uses, structures, or buildings on a lot.
Construction (Activity): Work done on a job site that produces an altered or new structure. Includes
excavation, assembly, and erection of components.
Construction Staging Plan: A site plan submitted with final design plans showing, at the minimum:
contractor parking, construction materials storage, limits of site disturbance, snow storage, refuse
storage, sanitation facilities, project signage, and construction trailer(s) location, as applicable.
Development: A form of activity that requires some form of permit or other approval pursuant to these
regulations, including: 1/ The building of a new residential, commercial, or industrial structure, 2/ The
alteration or modification of an existing residential, commercial, or industrial structure, 3/ Grading or
excavation activity that is intended to prepare a construction site.
Drainage (System): A built system of pipes, channels, or trenches, or finished grades utilized to
convey waste water or water borne waste in a collective and organized method.
Driveway: A paved all-weather driving surface on private property which provides access to dwelling
units.
Duplex: A detached building containing two dwelling units, designed for or used as a dwelling
exclusively by two families, each living as an independent housekeeping unit.
Dwelling Unit: Any building or portion thereof for residential purposes, including single-family, two-
family, duplex, multifamily dwellings, but not including hotel, motel, or lodge (accommodation) units.
Easements: A conveyance or reservation of an incident of ownership in real property for one or more
specific purposes, public or private.
Exterior Storage: Storage outside of a building or dwelling unit.
Exterior Walls: The outer wall surfaces of a building, structure, or dwelling unit.
Fences: Enclosing framework for exterior areas, such as yards or gardens.
Final Design Plan: A hard-line plan which meets the requirements indicated in Appendix 3.
4
I
i
Frontage: The portion of a lot that fronts on a public or private street.
Fireplace: Opening at the base of a chimney in which combustible material, such as wood or gas, can
be safely burned to produce heat. Specific designations of fireplaces by type are as defined in Chapter
15.40 of the Town of Avon Municipal Code.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 6
Adopted November 6, 2001
r
M
Grade (existing): The existing or natural topography of a site prior to construction.
Grade (finished): The grade upon completion of a construction project.
Gross Floor Area: The total surface floor areas of a structure, including habitable and non-habitable
areas unless specifically noted.
Hard Line Drawing: An architectural or engineering drawing produced by the use of computer aided
graphics, or other mechanical implement, which does not represent free-hand drawing.
Landscape Area: The area of a site not covered by buildings, driveways, and covered walkways.
Areas such as water features and other similar features appurtenant to natural landscape areas shall also
be considered part of the landscaping area.
Lot or Site: A parcel of land occupied or intended to be occupied by a use, building, or structure under
the provisions of Title 17, Zoning Regulations, and meeting the minimum requirements of Title 16,
Subdivision Regulations. A lot or site may consist of a single lot of record, a portion of a lot record, a
combination of lots of record or portions thereof, or a parcel of and described by metes and bounds.
Minor Project/Minor Modification: Certain forms of exterior development and improvement that are
exempted from the public review process by the Director of Community Development.
Multifamily Residence: A building containing three (3) or more dwelling units, not including hotels
or lodges, but including townhouses, condominiums and apartments with accessory use facilities
limited to an office, laundry, recreation facilities and off-street parking used by the occupants.
Owner/Owner Representative: The owner of title to a property, or his/her designated appointee and
representative for an application. Designation of a representative must be made in writing as part of
any application.
P.E. Stamped Design: A design that is stamped, signed, and date by a Colorado registered
professional engineer.
Planning and Zoning Commission: A commission established in the Avon Municipal Code 2.16.010,
to operate in accordance with its own rules of procedure as provided for in Section 11.2 of the Town
Charter.
Retaining Wall: A wall designed to maintain differences in ground elevations by holding back a bank
of material.
y ?/M.I(1 Mb?M j ?M I M . MMM
1
Setback: The distance from a lot or site line, creek or stream measured horizontally to a line or
location within the lot or site, which established the permitted location of uses, structures, or buildings
on the site.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 7
Adopted November 6, 2001
Sketch Plan: The first formal application for design review. Sketch plan must be approved prior to
applying for final design review, and after a pre-application meeting has been held with Community
Development staff, an comply with requirements indicated in Ayyendix 33.
Single Family Residence: A residence building containing not more than one dwelling unit occupied
exclusively by one family as an independent housekeeping unit.
Site Coverage: The ratio of the total building and disturbed area on a site to the total area of a site,
expressed as a percentage.
Site Plan: A drawing that shows, at a minimum, property lines of a building lot, elevation information,
compass direction, length and scale of property information, and the locations of structures to be built
on the lot. See example site plan in Annendix 77.
Snow Storage Area: An area equal to twenty percent (20%) of impermeable surfaced area upon
which aboveground construction does not occur shall be designated as a `snow-storage area' and not
developed in a manner inconsistent with such use. Landscaping shall not be considered inconsistent
with such use. Any designated snow storage area shall be not less than six feet (6') wide, shall be
adjacent to the impermeable area from which the snow is to be removed, shall not be included in any
parking area required by the minimum parking requirements, and shall be contained in such a manner
that runoff is directed though a treatment facility (when required). See 17.50.100 `Snow Storage' of
Avon Municipal Code for additional design requirements.
Slope: Shall be established by measuring the maximum number of feet in elevation gained or lost over
each ten feet (10') or fraction thereof measured horizontally in any direction between opposing lot
lines. The relationship of elevation or vertical measure as divided by the horizontal measurement shall
be expressed as a percentage as a means of quantifying the term "slope".
Staff: Town of Avon Community Development employees.
Staff Approval: Approval on a minor project that is reviewed and issued by Staff, without public
hearing.
Survey: A land plat survey, stamped and signed by a registered Colorado Surveyor, showing contour
intervals at engineering scale of 1"=10'. No survey will be accepted that is older than 3 years from the
receipt date of design review submittal.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 8
Adopted November 6, 2001
Table 1.0: Residential Access. Parkina. and Enaineerina Standards
Standard Single Family Duplex Multi Family Other:
Driveway Min: 14 feet Min: 14 feet Min: 20 Over Duplex upon
Curb cut Max: 18 feet Max: 18 feet Max: 24 review by Town
Engineer
Driveway 4% maximum for 4% maximum 4% maximum for Heated area may
Grades first 20' adjacent for first 20' first 20' adjacent not encroach
and adjacent and and perpendicular beyond property
perpendicular to perpendicular to public way/ 4% line.
public way/ 4% to public way/ maximum for first
maximum for 4% maximum 20' adjacent to
first 20' adjacent for first 20' garage/ 8%
to garage / 10% adjacent to Maximum
Maximum garage / 10%
Maximum
Permitted 1 Permitted 1 Permitted 1 Permitted (6 Additional points
Curb Cuts DU's and under) of access must be
approved
specifically
Parking 2 spaces per 2 spaces per Studio: 1 space See Zoning Code
Requirements unit/ 3 spaces unit/ 3 spaces 1 Bedroom: 1.5 for specific
per units over per units over spaces requirements
2,500 sq. ft (not 2,500 sq. ft (not (section
inc. garage) inc. garage) All others: 2 17.24.020)
spaces
Parking Stall 9' x 18' minimum 9'x 18' 9' x 18' minimum / See Zoning Code
Size / 7.5' vertical minimum / 7.5' 7.5' vertical for specific
Minimums clearance / 90 vertical clearance / 90 requirements
degree parking clearance / 90 degree parking (section
degree parking 17.24.020) &
guest parking
requirements
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 9
Adopted November 6, 2001
4. Residential Development Guidelines
General Design Compatibility
All design shall be compatible with existing built structures, the immediate unbuilt environment, and
the design philosophy of the Town. It should not be inferred from these guidelines that all buildings
are expected to have similar design. The overall objective of these guidelines is allow flexibility so
that individual building sites can directly respond to the topography and unique features of the natural
unbuilt environment. Buildings should be treated as an integral part of the site, rather than separate
objects at odds with their surroundings. However, compatibility should be achieved through the use
and proper consideration of the guideline criteria contained herein.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 10
Adopted November 6, 2001
On the Eagle River at Eaglebend, Filing No. 1.
A. Residential Site Development
Site design
Site design and layout is critical to appropriate architectural development of a structure and its
supporting improvements to the property. Buildings should blend in with natural settings, be stepped
in appearance where practical, and be limited in the need for extensive site grading and slope retention.
Buildings should be compatible with the site, and not appear to intrude or project from a lot with no
relation to the surrounding landforms.
® Requirements:
® 1. Site layout and proposed improvements shall consider the use of passive and active solar
use.
2. The location of structures and access shall complement the existing topography of the site.
Excessive grading and/or the use of engineer-designed retaining walls is discouraged when
an alternate site layout would minimize such disturbances.
3. Removal of vegetation, trees, and other significant landforms on a site will be limited and
not extend beyond a demarcated site disturbance area identified on submitted plans. The
identification and removal of noxious non-native vegetation and replacement with native
vegetation shall be encouraged on properties regardless of where they exist on site (ie.
outside site disturbance area).
4. All disturbed areas should be revegetated with recommended plant species listed in
Appendix 1. The use of listed noxious weeds, as provided in Appendix 2, is prohibited.
5. Where no development has been identified, construction shall at a minimum avoid: all
drainage and utility easements, development setbacks, areas over 30% in slope, and unique
and sensitive natural site features.
6. Buildings on sloping lots shall be designed to step with the existing (natural) grades.
Site Access
Access to the building site requires consideration of topography and building orientation. Avoidance
of steep slopes, the blending of access with the natural contours of a site, and sensitivity to solar
orientation, are important in establishing a successful access. Where access drives connect to public
streets, drainage and landscape maintenance are the responsibility of the owner. Additionally, heated
driveways must not exceed the property line.
F Requirements:
1. Adequate distance from intersections and proper relation to other entrances.
2. Satisfactory width, grades, radii etc. as indicated in Table 1.0.
3. Turn lanes, if required by the Town Engineer, shall be designed in accordance with
® requirements indicated in Table 1.0.
4. Residential projects with 6 or fewer units shall be restricted to a single point of vehicle
access from the public right-of-way. Additional points of access must be specifically
approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission, with the finding that additional access
points are required for the project to otherwise conform to these Design Standards and other
applicable Town regulations.
5. The grade of the first 20 feet of driveway adjacent and perpendicular to the paved public
way shall not exceed 4% grade.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 11
Adopted November 6, 2001
6. Parking lot grades should not exceed 6% and driveway grades should not exceed 8% for
multi-family residential and commercial projects or 10% for small residential projects.
7. The grade of the first 20 feet of driveway adjacent to the garage or outside parking space
shall not exceed 4% grade.
8. Project site plans shall include provisions for emergency vehicle access when required by
Code or local emergency service provider.
9. Adequate maneuvering for vehicles on site must be provided.
Parking and Loading
Parking and loading location and design is significant in avoiding conflict in multi-family projects, and
avoiding the potential of regular on-street parking in all neighborhoods. The intent of parking and
loading design on site is to provide residents and guests suitable parking locations that are also durable
and functional.
Requirements:
1. Required spaces provided must be in compliance with standards set forth in the `Access,
Parking, and Engineering Standards' Table 1.0.
2. All spaces must be accessible and meet minimum size requirements as outlined in the
`Access, Parking; and Engineering Standards' Table 1.0.
3. Residential loading spaces properly located to function with improvements and accessible
to delivery vehicles without restricting street traffic or on-site circulation.
4. Pavement design must be compatible with proposed use. All parking surfaces shall be
asphalt, concrete, concrete pavers, or another impervious surface. Gravel is not an
acceptable material.
Easements
Disturbance in drainage and utility easements should be avoided. Landscaping placed in easements
may be subject to removal and are the responsibility of the property owner to replace and maintain.
Trees placed in drainage easements paralleling public streets may be damaged or destroyed by Town
maintenance operations.
Requirements:
1. Dedicated easements shall remain unobstructed unless they are officially vacated.
2. Landscaping improvements shall avoid placement in easements whenever possible. Any
landscaping improvements placed in easements shall be the responsibility of the property
owner to maintain and replace should they be damaged or destroyed by the Town while
doing drainage, snowplowing, or utility work.
Site Grading
Grading a property should be minimized, and only done as necessary for building improvement.
Grading required in easements and setbacks is expected to be restored and revegetated to natural
conditions before site construction is complete. Where finished grades require retaining wall
placement, a series of lower retaining walls with landscaped terraces is preferable to a high wall with
an unbroken vertical face.
Requirements:
1. Site improvements should be designed to conform with existing site topography to
minimize required grading and effect on adjacent properties. All grading shall occur within
the property boundaries. Both existing and finished grades are required to be clearly
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 12
Adopted November 6, 2001
marked on the site plan submittal, to the extent specified on the Minimum Submittal
Requirements (Appendix 3) checklist.
2. Maximum slope of disturbed slopes shall not exceed 2 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical
without special documentation and review.
3. Horizontal and vertical variations in grading cut and fill areas should resemble a natural
configuration. Long slopes should be varied to avoid the appearance of flat surfaces, unless
the original slope was in this configuration prior to grading.
4. Building siting and foundation excavation shall avoid the disruption of existing natural
features such as mature trees whenever possible.
5. All grading, including utility connection, is required to be shown within the proposed `site
disturbance boundary' on submitted application plan sets.
6. All grading shall require erosion control methods so that dirt and fill material does not leave
the property on to the public right of way and adjacent properties. A surety may be
required for the proper installation and maintenance of erosion control.
7. All graded areas shall be revegetated as soon as practicable during the construction process.
Dust suppression and the prevention of noxious weed infestation is the responsibility of the
developer.
A well-sited home requires less extensive grading and creates a more natural `stepped ' appearance on a slope,
such as this home at Eaglebend, Filing 1.
Drainaee
Adequate grading plans ensure that drainage is functional on a building site. Drainage easements must
remain substantially unobstructed to accommodate drainage from a building site. Grading plans must
adequately demonstrate positive drainage away from building structures.
Requirements:
1. All drainage easements shall remain unobstructed.
i own of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 13
Adopted November 6, 2001
2. All structures shall be located above or be protected from the 100-year floodplain, where
identified by FEMA mapping. Where mapping is unavailable, the Town may require a
qualified engineer to conduct an analysis of whether or not the proposed structures are
proposed in a floodway or floodplain.
3. Minimum setback of thirty feet shall be maintained from mean annual high water mark of
all continuously flowing streams.
4. All development shall conform to the Town of Avon Drainage Design Manual, as part of
the Master Drainage Study (Sept. 1994/Appendix 5).
5. All construction projects shall conform to the Town of Avon Pollution Control Plan
Manual. (Appendix 4).
Snow Removal and Storage
The Town of Avon receives varying amounts of precipitation depending on aspect and elevation,
typically in the form of snow. However, all sites must be able to adequately accommodate and
transport snow on site and in conjunction with approved drainage easements.
Requirements:
1.
2.
3.
4.
An area equal to 20% of the total impermeable surfaced area of the site, upon which
aboveground construction does not occur, shall be designated and developed as a snow
storage area.
Designated snow storage areas shall be located and developed to be compatible with snow
removal operations, not less than six (6') feet wide, and shall be adjacent to the
impermeable area from which the snow is to be removed.
Runoff from snow storage areas shall be directed through a treatment facility as required for
treatment of runoff from parking and driveway areas.
On-site snow storage requirements may be waived by the Planning and Zoning Commission
upon the demonstration that an appropriate alternative snow-storage site is available and
that arrangements have been made for the continuation of snow removal and off-site
storage.
5. Excavation, retaining walls, or other structures within slope maintenance and snow storage
easements adjacent to public rights-of-way shall be confined to those strictly required for
effective site access.
Water and Sewer. Trash Storage
Each site design shall address the availability and design of water and sewer service, along with trash
storage on the lot. Trash storage must be identified on the site plan, including design detail, for all
multi-family units greater than a duplex.
Requirements:
1.
2.
3.
4. All trash receptacles shall be screened from public view and protected from disturbance.
Each structure designed for human occupancy shall be connected with water and sewer
facilities made available by existing water and sewer districts. Letters of commitment from
the appropriate districts may be required.
No private wells or sewer systems shall be used within the Town except as provided in the
Subdivision Regulations.
Each project shall have receptacles for the temporary storage and collection of refuse. The
handling of trash for all projects larger than a duplex (ie. triplex) shall be noted on the site
plan. When necessary, bear resistant trash receptacles may be required.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines rage 14
Adopted November 6, 2001
r
5. Refuse storage area shall be accessible by collection vehicles and should be incorporated
into building design whenever possible. Non combustible receptacles only for ash.
Sidewalks
As necessary in certain subdivisions and planned unit developments, the inclusion of sidewalks on a
property may be required by the Town to provide a neighborhood amenity.
Requirements:
1. Sidewalks or walkways should be provided as necessary for efficient pedestrian circulation
within the project and with neighboring properties. Walkways should be separated from
vehicular traffic where possible.
2. Walkways should be constructed of attractive, durable materials such as decorative concrete
or brick pavers.
3. Walkway widths should be compatible with anticipated uses, but in no instance, shall be
less than 4' wide as a minimum standard.
r
r
b
I
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 15
Adopted November 6, 2001
B. Residential Building Design
General Design Character
In addition to the stated Design Philosophy, and General Design Compatibility, a residential building
must conform to setback, building area ratios, and height limitations of the applicable zone district.
Buildings should be oriented to take advantage of solar gain and view corridors, where possible.
Additionally, building design and location should generally minimize impacts on solar and view
corridors of neighboring properties. It is preferred that residential buildings be designed as a
composition of mass elements rather than larger single `blocks' that appear unrelated in form and
context.
Building Height
The height of structures, unless otherwise specified in a planned unit development, shall conform to
the zone district limitations stated in Title 17: Zoning Regulations. The definition of height is set forth
in the `Definitions' section of these guidelines. No exceptions to the height requirements shall be
made, except for penetrations that add architectural variety such as flues, chimneys, cupolas, etc.
A4,js MWAMDmOL
?t?Wcrt.+m 6??
sx??rtKb
`8i? catoE
Building Height will be determined by utilizing the site development plan and elevations. All ridge
elevations, and numeric existing and proposed grades must he labeled on the site plan to accurately
determine height. Additionally, the elevation plans must show existing and proposed grades (also labeled
in numeric form), such as the illustration above.
Buildine Materials and Colors
The intent of these guidelines is to provide architectural control to ensure that the architectural design
of structures and their materials and colors are visually harmonious with the town's overall
appearance, with surrounding development, with natural and existing landforms, and with officially
approved development plans. These guidelines should represent the minimum standard to achieve this
goal, without being so cumbersome as to not allow varied high-quality design that meets this intent.
Requirements:
1. The use of high quality, durable building materials is highly encouraged.
2. The following materials and wall finishes will not ordinarily be permitted on the exterior of
any structure: asphalt siding, imitation brick, asbestos cement shingles or siding, imitation
log siding or plastic. Metal siding, concrete or concrete block will be permitted only with
specific approval of the Commission. Each building must use a minimum of two materials.
3. Indigenous natural or earth tones required.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 16
Adopted November 6, 2001
E
t
t
4
S
4. All flues, flashing and other reflective materials shall be painted to match and/or
appropriately contrast with adjacent materials. In some cases, physical screening may be
required.
5. Electric and other utility meters shall be attached to the main structure and screened to
minimize contrast with adjacent materials.
Exterior_ Walls, Roofs, and Architectural Interest
The Town of Avon is not comprised of a singular and unified `neighborhood' theme, however, it does
contain several architecturally distinct neighborhoods. Within these neighborhoods exist a variety of
exterior wall types that typify the type of design that is appropriate to our community.
Requirements:
1. Exterior wall colors should be compatible with the site and surrounding buildings. The
appropriate use of predominantly indigenous building materials such as native stone, wood
siding, and timbers is encouraged in our mountain community.
2. Projections such as deep eaves, overhangs, canopies, and other features that provide
architectural interest are encouraged. Fenestration should be articulated on large exterior
walls to break up massing. At a minimum, no single wall plane should exceed 70% of the
elevation of any exposure. Breaks in the wall plane should form at least a 2-foot
step/setback.
3. All roofs, except the flat portion thereof, shall have a rise of not less than 4-inches in 12-
inches of distance. Primary roofs shall have a 4:12 minimum, and a 12:12 maximum.
Secondary roofs shall have a 4:12 minimum, and metal roofs shall have a 3:12 minimum.
There shall be no unbroken ridgelines allowed, except on pueblo roofs that are otherwise
traditionally articulated.
4. Pitched roofs shall be oriented such that excessive snow and ice does not accumulate over,
or drop onto pedestrian walkways, parking areas or drives. Special protection may be
required for roofs so oriented. Overhangs are required on pitched roofs, and shall extend at
least one and one-half feet from the point where the wall meets the roof.
5. Roofing materials should be durable, weather resistant and suitable for environmental
conditions encountered in this area. Colors should be natural or earth tones. Large
expanses of bright, reflective materials will not be acceptable, however, metal such as
copper, cor-ten may be acceptable. Asphalt and fiberglass composition shingles must be of
high quality and minimum weight of 300 pounds per square. Untreated shakes are not
permitted.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 17
Adopted November 6, 2001
An example of expressive architectural interest on a Pueblo Revival home in Wildridge.
Outdoor Lighting
Access to a clear and visible night sky is a strong value to our community. Light pollution is a threat
to our clear skies that are part of the heritage of the Rocky Mountain West. Night lighting on a site
should generally be regulated to minimize the undesirable effects that `over-lighting' a site or
residence can have on a community, neighbors, and guests. At the same time, lighting is desirable for
safety and aesthetic purposes.
Requirements:
1. Lighting should be considered as a design feature as well as providing illumination for
aesthetic and safety purposes only. There shall be no exposed light source on a property,
and all fixtures must utilize frosted or seeded glass. In any case, light fixtures shall not
cause glare beyond the property.
2. Floodlights are not permitted. Light spillover to adjacent properties must be minimized. No
exposed bulbs are permitted.
3. Lights that flash, move, revolve, rotate, flicker, blink, or vary in both intensity and color to
emit intermittent pulsation shall be expressly prohibited as fixed light sources. This does
not include holiday/seasonal lighting, which is temporary in nature for the holiday/season.
Duplex Developments
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 of 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.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 18
Adopted November 6, 2001
1
i
t
C. Residential Landscaping
0 Design Character
Landscaping should harmonize the building site with both the natural topography and existing
vegetation. All materials used should be indigenous to an area, represented by adjacent properties, and
not contain any noxious weeds or undesirable exotic plants.
Requirements:
1. Landscaping design should be compatible with other site improvements and with
dh neighboring properties.
2. Not less than 50% of the useable open space area required, shall consist of pervious
landscaped areas. The remaining useable open space requirements may be satisfied by
impervious patio or mall type areas containing seating, decorative fountains, planters,
recreational amenities and similar type facilities.
3. Consideration should be given to use of landscape material for snow fencing, visual
screening and wind breaks when applicable.
4. Plant materials should be adaptable to the area and selection and placement should include
Consideration of function and color coordination. A list of recommended plant species that
are compatible with various climate zones found in the Town is attached in Appendix 1.
No noxious weeds, as listed in Appendix 2, shall be permitted for use in the Town.
5. All lots to be covered by grass lawns shall utilize healthy sod material for complete
coverage. All grass sod shall extend to the property line or, where adjacent to a roadway, to
the bottom of adjacent drainage ditch or back of curb, as applicable. Fire Resistant
landscaping in areas with wildfires is required.
6. An automatic irrigation system is required to reduce losses and for ease of maintenance.
The landscaping site plan must include, at a minimum, a note regarding the proper
installation of an automatic irrigation system, its maintenance, and intended use.
Good landscaping that utilizes native vegetation should accentuate, not hide the structure. Wildridge.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 19
Adopted November 6, 2001
Fencing and Screening
Fencing is discouraged, and will only be permitted where it complements the character of the property,
existing grades and landforms, and compliments the landscaping rather than contain the property.
Fences that delineate property boundaries are not permitted.
Requirements:
Fences, walls, or similar type barriers shall have a separate approval of the Commission,
except that functional or decorative fences or walls may be approved as an integral part of a
building and landscaping design. Wood fences are generally more acceptable than metal.
Limited use of fences, such as to screen trash areas and utility equipment, is encouraged.
Fence materials shall be compatible with the site and the materials of the structures on the
site. No chain link fences shall be permitted in residential areas, except for use as a
temporary construction fences or for use in public recreational facilities. The use of
chicken wire, or metal screening, with split rail fencing is discouraged. However, should
the fencing comply with the requirements of this section, the fenced area must be less than
1/4 of the perimeter of the property and no more than 4 feet in height.
Where noted by the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW), accepted wildlife corridors
shall be accommodated to a reasonable degree on all properties when considering the layout
of site disturbances.
Fencing should not delineate property lines. This type of fencing is no longer acceptable.
Erosion Control
Erosion control is essential at all building sites. Design plans must indicate the type, method, and
placement of erosion control structures on the property. A surety may be required to ensure proper
installation and maintenance of these items. Required erosion control techniques and Best
Management Practices (BMP's) for small residential projects are listed in the Pollution Control Plan
(Appendix 4). All other projects will need to reference the Avon Master Drainage Study, available in
the Community Development Department.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 20
Adopted November 6, 2001
4
4
t
-1 Retainine Walls
The limited use of retaining walls is encouraged. Whenever possible, retaining walls should be
utilized only in those areas of a site where finished grades cannot meet recommended standards. Small
retaining walls using natural stone boulders are encouraged for use and design with site landscaping.
Requirements:
1. Retaining walls shall be constructed of permanent type materials such as concrete, gabions,
reinforced earth, etc. Railroad ties (6x6 treated timbers) are not acceptable. Retaining wall
design details may be required for design review.
2. Walls over 4 feet high shall be structurally designed or certified by a licensed engineer
(P.E.).
3. A series of lower retaining walls with landscaped terraces is preferable to a high wall with
an unbroken vertical face.
Well landscaped and structured retaining wall use along a driveway in Wildridge.
1
I
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 21
Adopted November 6, 2001
D. Residential Miscellaneous Items
Accessory Structures
Requirements:
1. Temporary structures including construction storage and office trailers, and tents shall not
be allowed except as may be determined to be necessary during construction.
2. Permits for allowed temporary structures may be issued by the Community Development
Department as a minor modification/minor project without review by the Commission.
Permits shall run concurrent with building permit.
3. Any accessory structures on the building site shall be compatible with the design and
materials utilized for the main building structure. Permits for accessory structures may be
issued by the Community Development Department as a minor modification/minor project
without review by the Commission.
4. Accessory structures must be shown on the final design site plan, and should generally be
attached to the main building. The method of attachment should be generally compatible
with the overall architectural design. Non-attached accessory structures are discouraged
from placement on the front and sides of the building.
Signs
Requirements:
1. No signs, billboards, or other advertising of any kind shall be erected constructed, or
maintained on any lot or structure unless approved in accordance with the provisions
contained in the Sign Code of the Town of Avon (Section 15.28.00).
Communications & Satellite Dish Antennae
Satellite dishes are permitted in residential areas, however, with restrictions on screening these dishes
from neighboring properties. Screening may be accomplished through the placement on a building;
however, a separately built fence/screen may not be used.
Requirements:
1. All antennas shall be located so as to be screened from view from any public right-of-way
or neighboring property. Screening may be accomplished by, or through the use of
landscaping materials, existing structures, sub-grade placements or other means that both
screen the antennas and appear natural to the site.
2. All wiring and cable related to antennas installation shall be installed underground or be
incorporated entirely within the structure.
3. Color selection for dish antennas should blend with the site and structure. Unpainted
surfaces and dish antennas with reflective surfaces shall not be allowed, and surfaces are
required to be painted to match adjacent surfaces. No advertising, logos or identification
shall be allowed on any dish antenna.
Above Ground Tanks and Miscellaneous Structures
Requirements:
1. Oil, gasoline or liquid petroleum gas tanks will not normally be permitted on or above
ground. Temporary installations for a period not exceeding 2 years may be approved
provided the installation complies with all applicable regulations and is fully screened from
view from all public rights-of-way and neighboring properties.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 22
Adopted November 6, 2001
4
t
4
E
4
4
t
4
4
i
i
4
4
E
4
4
4
S
i
4
i
4
4
2. No outdoor clotheslines, trash receptacles, or storage areas will be permitted unless
screened.
3. Screening details shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission prior to installation.
4. Flues, vents, chimneys, and other mechanical penetrations of a roof on any structure shall
be fully enclosed and screened in such a manner as to conform to the overall design
character, and equipped with spark arrestors.
1
1
1
1
1 Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 23
Adopted November 6, 2001
5. Commercial and Industrial Development Guidelines
The overall design theme for the Town should be consistent with the dominant character of existing
development, to establish and attractive appearance for visitors and residents, and yet be flexible
enough to allow affordable design solutions. The architectural styles of the existing buildings vary
greatly. However, most of them can be described as contemporary, having in common, pitched roofs,
stepped facades, recessed windows, balconies, and subtle colors (gray, cream, tan and brown). In
contrast, there are a few buildings that have vibrant blue or red roofs, or long blank, windowless
walls. These buildings are the exception rather than `the norm'.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 24
Adopted November 6, 2001
A contemporary commercial building in downtown Avon.
A. Commercial and Industrial Site Development
Site design
Buildings and other improvements should be individually designed for the site on which they are to be
placed. The site and its relationship to other structures, scenic values, views, and climatic orientation
should be the dominant factors in the design and sighting of buildings. Pedestrian access ways should
be aligned and focused on architectural or aesthetic features.
Requirements:
1. Site layout and proposed improvements shall consider the use of passive and active solar
use, and the retention of neighboring properties `view corridors'.
2. The location of structures and access shall complement the existing topography of the site.
Excessive grading and/or the use of engineer-designed retaining walls is discouraged when
an alternate site layout would minimize such disturbances.
3. Buildings and improvements shall be designed and sited to conform to the natural terrain
and to take advantage of views. Terraced buildings and parking will minimize site
disturbance, and disturbed areas should be revegetated with recommended plant species
listed in Appendix 1. The use of listed noxious weeds, as provided in Appendix 2, is
prohibited.
4. Where no development has been identified, construction shall at a minimum avoid: all
drainage and utility easements, development setbacks, areas over 40% in slope, and unique
and sensitive natural site features.
5. The use of sun exposure-reducing elements such as overhangs, pergolas, canopies, eaves
and awnings should be designed as integral components of the architectural design. Passive
solar design is encouraged. However within these spaces, there should be a variety of sun
and shade conditions to allow full use during the extreme heat of summer months and take
advantage of warm winter days. North facing entries and outdoor space such as courtyards
and plazas should be carefully considered because of winter conditions.
Views
OP
Srvolaft- rkM9
e *wtya rd
so%r EtpwUrd,
1^erreced bvildin?r
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 25
Adopted November 6, 2001
Site Access
Access to the building site requires consideration of topography and building orientation. Avoidance
of steep slopes, the blending of access with the natural contours of a site, and sensitivity to solar
orientation, are important in establishing a successful access. Where access drives connect to public
streets, drainage and landscape maintenance are the responsibility of the owner. Additionally, heated
driveways must not exceed the property line.
Requirements:
1. Adequate distance from intersections and proper relation to other entrances.
2. Satisfactory width, grades, radii etc. as indicated in Table 1.0.
3. Turn lanes, if required by the Town Engineer, shall be designed in accordance with
requirements indicated in Table 1.0.
4. Residential projects with 6 or fewer units shall be restricted to a single point of vehicle
access from the public right-of-way. Additional points of access must be specifically
approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission, with the finding that additional access
points are required for the project to otherwise conform to these Design Standards and other
applicable Town regulations.
5. The grade of the first 20 feet of driveway adjacent and perpendicular to the paved public
way shall not exceed 4% grade.
6. Parking lot grades should not exceed 6% and driveway grades should not exceed 8% for
multi-family residential, mixed-use, and commercial projects or 10% for small residential
projects.
7. The grade of the first 20 feet of driveway adjacent to the garage or outside parking space
shall not exceed 4% grade.
8. Project site plans shall include provisions for emergency vehicle access when required.
9. Adequate maneuvering for all vehicles on site must be provided.
Parking and Loading
Surface parking is discouraged in the pedestrian oriented commercial areas of the Town, except for
short-term use and service functions. The predominant parking functions should occur in structured
parking areas for large commercial projects. The more vehicular oriented commercial core area is
designated for surface parking.
Requirements:
1. Required spaces provided must be in compliance with standards set forth in Section
17.24.020 of the Town of Avon Zoning Code.
2. All spaces must be accessible and meet minimum size requirements as required in Section
17.24.020 of the Town of Avon Zoning Code.
3. All parking must be off-street. Ninety-degree stalls are encouraged. Complete vehicular
circulation including back-up and turn-around areas must be provided.
4. Parking areas must be concrete or asphalt with spaces clearly marked. Two handicapped
stalls per each 100 stalls is recommended. Snow storage areas equaling 15% of all parking
areas are recommended.
5. Driveway or maneuvering areas within a parking lot must be designed to provide for safe
and reasonable maneuverability of vehicles.
6. Parking areas should include landscaping and screen surface parking.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 26
Adopted November 6, 2001
Easements
I
i
?x?!y, 8crrns
Landscape
Parking Lot Strmain9
Lsneftta pecl /cland
Disturbance in drainage and utility easements should be avoided. Landscaping placed in easements
may be subject to removal and are the responsibility of the property owner to replace and maintain.
Trees placed in drainage easements paralleling public streets may be damaged or destroyed by Town
maintenance operations.
Requirements:
1. Dedicated easements shall remain unobstructed unless they are officially vacated.
2. Landscaping improvements shall avoid placement in easements whenever possible. Any
landscaping improvements placed in easements shall be the responsibility of the property
owner to maintain and replace should they be damaged or destroyed by the Town or local
service district while doing drainage, snowplowing, or utility work.
Site Grading
Grading a property should be minimized, and only done as necessary for building improvement.
Grading required in easements and setbacks is expected to be restored and revegetated to natural
conditions before site construction is complete. Where finished grades require retaining wall
placement, a series of lower retaining walls with landscaped terraces is preferable to a high wall with
an unbroken vertical face.
Requirements:
L Site improvements should be designed to conform with existing site topography to
minimize required grading and effect on adjacent properties. All grading shall occur within
the property boundaries. Both existing and finished grades are required to be clearly
marked on the site plan submittal, to the extent specified on the Minimum Submittal
Requirements (Appendix 3) checklist.
2. Maximum slope of disturbed slopes shall not exceed 2 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical
without special documentation and review.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 27
Adopted November 6, 2001
Parkins Arca
Interior Landscapini
Carth Berms i Landwarc
3. Horizontal and vertical variations in grading cut and fill areas should resemble a natural
configuration. Long slopes should be varied to avoid the appearance of flat surfaces, unless
the original slope was in this configuration prior to grading.
4. Building sighting and foundation excavation shall avoid the disruption of existing natural
features such as mature trees whenever possible.
5. All grading, including utility connections, is required to be shown within the proposed `site
disturbance boundary' on submitted application plan sets.
6. All grading shall require erosion control methods so that dirt and fill material does not leave
the property on to the public right of way and adjacent properties. A surety may be
required for the proper installation and maintenance of erosion control.
7. All graded areas shall be revegetated as soon as practicable during the construction process.
Dust suppression and the prevention of noxious weed infestation is the responsibility of the
owner/developer.
8. Retaining walls shall be constructed of permanent type materials such as concrete, gabions,
reinforced earth, etc. railroad ties are not acceptable. Retaining wall design details may be
required for design review.
9. Walls over 4 feet high shall be structurally designed or certified by a licensed engineer
(P.E.).
Drainage
Adequate grading plans ensure that drainage is functional on a building site. The builder is responsible
for preventing erosion of the site both during construction and after the project is complete. Grading
plans must adequately demonstrate positive drainage away from building structures.
Requirements:
1. All drainage easements shall remain unobstructed. Drainage into common open space is not
allowed except in existing natural drainage channels or drainage easements. Drainage
swales should not surface drain across major walkways or trail systems. Parking bays and
walkways should not slope toward the building without adequate provisions for draining
storm water away from the structure. All paved areas must be sloped to drain.
2. All structures shall be located above or be protected from the 100-year floodplain, where
identified by FEMA mapping. Where mapping is unavailable, the Town may require a
qualified engineer to conduct an analysis of whether or not the proposed structures are
proposed in a floodway or floodplain.
3. Minimum setback of thirty feet shall be maintained from mean annual high water mark of
all continuously flowing streams.
4. All development shall conform to the Town of Avon Drainage Design Manual, as part of
the Master Drainage Study (Sept. 1994). (Appendix 5).
5. All construction projects shall conform to the Town of Avon Pollution Control Plan
Manual. (Appendix 4).
Snow Removal and Storage
The Town of Avon receives varying amounts of precipitation depending on aspect and elevation,
typically in the form of snow. However, all sites must be able to adequately accommodate and
transport snow on site in conjunction with approved drainage easements.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 28
Adopted November 6, 2001
i
E
S
Requirements:
1. An area equal to 20% of the total impermeable surfaced area of the site, upon which
aboveground construction does not occur, shall be designated and developed as a snow
storage area.
2. Designated snow storage areas shall be located and developed to be compatible with snow
removal operations, not less than six (6') feet wide, and shall be adjacent to the
impermeable area from which the snow is to be removed.
3. Runoff from snow storage areas shall be directed through a treatment facility as required for
treatment of runoff from parking and driveway areas.
4. On-site snow storage requirements may be waived by the Planning and Zoning Commission
upon the demonstration that an appropriate alternative snow-storage site is available and
that arrangements have been made for the continuation of snow removal and off-site
storage.
5. Excavation, retaining walls, or other structures within slope maintenance and snow storage
easements adjacent to public rights-of-way shall be confined to those strictly required for
effective site access.
Water and Sewer. Trash Storage
Each site design shall address the availability and design of water and sewer service, along with trash
storage on the lot. Trash storage must be identified on the site plan, including design detail, for all
multi-family units greater than a duplex.
Requirements:
1. Each structure designed for human occupancy shall be connected with water and sewer
facilities made available by existing water and sewer districts. Letters of commitment from
® the appropriate districts may be required.
® 2. No private wells or sewer systems shall be used within the Town except as provided in the
Subdivision Regulations.
3. Each project shall have receptacles for the temporary storage and collection of refuse. The
handling of trash for all projects larger than a single-family unit (i.e. duplex, triplex) shall
be noted on the site plan. When necessary, bear resistant trash receptacles may be required.
4. All trash receptacles shall be screened from public view and protected from disturbance.
i 5. Refuse storage area shall be accessible by collection vehicles and should be incorporated
i into building design whenever possible. Non-combustible receptacles only for ash.
b
i
i
i
1
1
M
1 Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 29
Adopted November 6, 2001
A well-screened and attractive service and trash enclosure at the Brookside Lodge.
Sidewalks
As necessary in certain commercial subdivisions and planned unit developments, the inclusion of
sidewalks on a property may be required by the Town to provide a neighborhood amenity.
Requirements:
1. Sidewalks or walkways should be provided as necessary for efficient pedestrian circulation
within the project and with neighboring properties. Walkways should be separated from
vehicular traffic where possible.
2. Walkways should be constructed of attractive, durable materials such as decorative concrete
or brick pavers.
3. Walkway widths should be compatible with anticipated uses, but in no instance, shall be
less than 4' wide as a minimum standard.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 30
Adopted November 6, 2001
i
B. Commercial and Industrial Building Design
General Commercial Desi Character
In addition to the stated Design Philosophy, and General Design Compatibility, buildings should be
designed to maximize energy efficiency by limiting windows and doors on the north, and taking
advantage of sun exposure on the south. Additionally, building design and location should generally
minimize impacts on solar and view corridors of neighboring properties Building facades should be
stepped to avoid long straight walls, and entrances should be recessed. All sides of buildings should
receive equal architectural treatment. Windows should be placed to provide architectural interest.
Large, uninterrupted glass areas should be avoided.
At the pedestrian scale, buildings should contain quality design details that are harmonious with the
overall building architecture. Rooftop equipment and vents, as well as trash disposal and service areas,
should be concealed with a treatment that is complementary to the building architecture. It is preferred
that buildings be designed as a composition of architectural elements rather than larger single `blocks'
that appear unrelated in form and context.
Building Height
The height of structures, unless otherwise specified in a planned unit development, shall conform to
the zone district limitations stated in Title 17: Zoning Regulations. The definition of height is set forth
in the `Definitions' section of these guidelines. No exceptions to the height requirements shall be
made, except as specifically approved for penetrations of certain architectural projections such as flues,
chimneys, cupolas, towers or other elements that may have the potential to add architectural character
and variety to the skyline. Solar access is of primary importance within the town core, and commercial
designs may be required to provide solar access studies showing the effect of shading on adjacent
buildings and outdoor spaces (Sun studies should be prepared on a site plan of a scale not less than
1"=40' showing shadows at noon on March 21, June 21, September 21, and December 21).
Building Height will be determined by utilizing the site development plan and elevations. All ridge
elevations, and numeric existing and proposed grades must be labeled on the site plan to accurately
determine height. Additionally, the elevation plans must show existing and proposed grades (also
labeled in numeric form).
r Building Materials and Colors
The intent of these guidelines is to provide architectural control to "ensure that the architectural design
' of structures and their materials and colors are visually harmonious with the town's overall
appearance, with surrounding development, with natural and existing landforms, and with officially
approved development plans". These guidelines should represent the minimum standard to achieve
this goal, without being so cumbersome as to not allow varied high-quality design that meets this
intent.
Requirements:
1. The use of high quality, durable, low maintenance building materials is highly encouraged.
2. The following materials and wall finishes will not ordinarily be permitted on the exterior of
any structure: asphalt siding, imitation brick, asbestos cement shingles or siding, imitation
log siding or plastic. Metal siding, concrete or concrete block will be permitted only with
specific approval of the Commission. Each elevation must use a minimum of two materials
(i.e. stucco, siding, wood).
3. Natural or earth tones are encouraged as the dominant color with brighter colors used for
accent.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 31
Adopted November 6, 2001
4. All flues, flashing and other reflective materials shall be painted to match and/or
appropriately contrast with adjacent materials. In some cases, physical screening may be
required.
5. Electric and other utility meters shall be attached to the main structure and screened to
minimize contrast with adjacent materials.
Roofs
Roof forms are strong determinants of architectural style. Due to climatic conditions, roof forms
should be kept simple, with pitches limited to 6:12 to 12:12 for sloped roofs. Flat roofs are
discouraged except for limited roof areas for the location of concealed mechanical equipment, or for
architectural effect. Secondary shed-type roofs should have pitches no less than 4:12. Valleys and
complex roof forms are a potential source of ice buildup and water damage, and should be used
carefully and sparingly.
Requirements:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The use of dormers (shed, peaked, eyebrow, etc.) is encouraged to help break up large
expanses of roof, to enhance the usability of attic spaces, and to add interest to the roof-
scape.
Roofing materials should be durable, weather resistant and suitable for environmental
conditions encountered in this area. Colors should be natural or earth tones. Large
expanses of bright, reflective materials will not be acceptable. Asphalt and fiberglass
composition shingles must be of high quality and minimum weight of 300 pounds per
square. Untreated shakes are not permitted.
In the Town Core unglazed concrete, copper, standing seam metal, or terne-coated steel are
acceptable materials (Shake shingles, asphalt, and fiberglass roofs are generally
discouraged). Tile should be used in a dull finish in colors. Metal roofs with a dull finish
may also be considered, however colors should be muted to fit within the context.
All roofs, except the flat portion thereof, shall have a rise of not less than 4-inches in 12-
inches of distance.
Pitched roofs shall be oriented such that excessive snow and ice does not accumulate over,
or drop onto pedestrian walkways, parking areas or drives. Special protection may be
required for roofs so oriented Overhangs are required on pitched roofs, and shall extend at
least one and one-half feet from the point where the wall meets the roof. Minimum
overhang length is 18 inches.
Exposed metal flashing, gutters, downspouts or other building appurtenances must be
copper, steel, iron, or aluminum, applied and fastened in a high-quality manner. When
painted, these elements must be finished with a baked enamel paint, epoxy paint, or a
silicon-modified alloy.
Snow shedding is a major concern that must be carefully considered in the designing roofs.
Building entries, garage and service doors, shop fronts, and other points of entry must be
located out of the path of shedding snow. Gable fronts, covered porches, balconies, and
snow retention devices are all acceptable methods of dealing with snow shedding off of
sloped roofs. Landscape features such as retaining walls or raised planters may also be
used to direct pedestrians out of the way of snow or ice shed areas. Where removal of snow
from roofs is anticipated, mechanical and safety devices should be provided, as well as easy
access to the roof.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 32
Adopted November 6, 2001
i
t
e
Aft
,l
interesting roofforms add character, such as those found in the Westgate PUD.
Exterior Walls
The form of exterior walls in the commercial areas of the Town should grow out of a balanced
response between the public spaces they front and the interior functions they enclose. Walls can be
broken down in scale through the use of windows, doorways, recesses and setbacks. They should be
further articulated through the use of different materials, patterns, ornament, texture, and color. Walls
should also respond to solar exposure in their placement. Exterior walls should attempt to enclose
exterior space and to create a sense of `street'. This encourages the linkage of one building to the rest,
and the continuation of urban form as opposed to individual buildings in the landscape.
Requirements:
1. Stucco and synthetic stucco are suitable on upper walls of buildings. Joints, variety or
color, and changes in plan should create a sense of scale on stucco walls.
2. Stone elements should be used when appropriate on the base of larger buildings, up the
walls, or in elements such as chimneys or towers. Roughly squared stone set in a random
pattern is preferable to more formal uses of stone. In large walls, stone should be set with
larger stones at the bottom gradually diminishing to smaller stones at the top.
3. Projections such as deep eaves, overhangs, canopies, and other features that provide
architectural interest are encouraged. Fenestration should be articulated on large exterior
walls to break up massing. At a minimum, no single wall plane should exceed 70% of the
elevation of any exposure. Breaks in the wall plane should form at least a 2-foot
step/setback.
4. Wood siding should be avoided in commercial building where it will be in contact with
snow (at the base). The scale of wood siding (4", 6", 8", or larger) should be appropriate
and complement the desired design of an exterior wall space.
5. Exterior elements such as porches, roof overhangs, dormers, and gables should utilize
heavy timber when appropriate to create interest, give scale, and signify areas of
architectural importance.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 33
Adopted November 6, 2001
6. Poured-in-place or pre-cast concrete may be used where appropriate as column and
spandrel covers. At grade or poured-in-place walls with large stone aggregate are examples
that may be acceptable use of concrete in some commercial structures.
Windows
Windows establish patterns, rhythms, and scale on the exterior walls. They respond to uses and needs
on the interior and are recognizable indications of what goes on behind them. Variety in the use of
windows is encouraged within certain limits. Commercial spaces must have large areas of glass
opening onto public pathways, streets, or sidewalks (suggested goal is 75% glass). Hotels and other
private uses should have more limited use of glass. In all cases, large uninterrupted areas of glass are
discouraged. Division of windows by mullions and muntins adds character and gives scale to the
building.
Requirements:
1. Aluminum, steel, painted wood, or clad wood windows are permitted in all commercial
areas. Mirrored glass, snap-in muntins, glass curtain walls, and other assemblies which are
clearly out of character with the Town Core are prohibited.
2. Pedestrian level windows in commercial spaces require a minimum allowable glass area of
75% of walls opening on to the ground/pedestrian level. The maximum size of individual
panes of glass is not to exceed 16 square feet without special review. In general, areas of
glass unbroken by wall or structure should not exceed 150 square feet.
3. Pedestrian level windows in hotel or office spaces should be as open as possible and not
less than 50% glass, unless it is a north exposure, in which case glass may be reduced to
40%. The same restrictions apply to sizes of individual panes and areas of glass unbroken
by wall or structure.
4. All upper levels of commercial, hotel, and/or office area have no requirements for
percentage of window to wall, but are restricted to individual panes of a maximum of 10
square feet and a maximum overall glass area of 48 square feet per window opening.
Wt'ndaws
S1
pam
Doors and Entrvwavs
Public doors and entryways within the Town should be a combination of glass and metal or wood, or
solid wood. All-glass or all-metal doors are discouraged. Doors should be used to establish interest,
character, and variety along the public right-of-way. Where possible, gates, courtyards, staircases, and
bridges should be used to connect building sand create outdoor rooms and linkages. Service doors
may be hollow metal or solid wood in hollow metal frames.
Main entries should not be placed on the north side of buildings unless no other alternative exists.
When a main entry occurs on a north fagade it should be covered with a porch or porte cochere.
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
s
e
i
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 34
Adopted November 6, 2001
`0/0"" "rn wal/
W
1
1
1
Mcks and Balconies and Exterior Walkways
Decks and Balconies become part of the design palette used to enrich the character and create variety
on the building exteriors. Where possible, balconies and decks should be located to take advantage of
solar exposure, and should be used in combination with bay windows and other exterior projections.
Long, linear balconies such as might appear on a common motel are discouraged in the Town.
Care should also be taken in locating walkways to avoid placing them in areas which are in shadow all
winter long. On the north side of buildings, sidewalks should either be covered or far enough away
from the building to be out of its shadow for several hours each day.
Thrs
Outdoor Lighting
Lighting systems will serve functional and aesthetic roles in commercial areas. These roles are: to
provide security and visual safety, to serve as directional indicators for both vehicular and pedestrian
traffic; to provide extended outdoor use time, particularly in pedestrian gathering areas; and to
reinforce the identity and character of a project through form, color and materials of fixtures, visual
light quality, and placement.
Access to a clear and visible night sky is a strong value to our community. Night lighting on a site
should generally be regulated to minimize the undesirable effects that `over-lighting' a site can have on
a community, neighbors, and guests. At the same time, lighting is desirable for safety and aesthetic
purposes.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 35
Adopted November 6, 2001
L600, wa f S
Requirements:
1. Lighting should be provided for all parking, drive, and walkway areas and may be required
as a condition of design approval. In all commercial, retail and office parcels, lighting must
be designed and arranged so as not to reflect excessive light upon abutting or adjacent
properties. Floodlights are not permitted.
2. Lighting should be considered as a design feature as well as providing illumination. Area
lighting shall generally be a metal halide, cut-off type fixtures with a maximum mounting.
height of 15 feet for walkways and 25 feet for parking areas. There shall be no exposed
light source on a property, and all fixtures must utilize frosted or seeded glass.
3. Pedestrian areas should utilize low-level light sources to accent or illuminate the ground
plane. These design elements should provide light for safety and aesthetic effect. By day,
the physical shapes and sizes lend animation and scale to pedestrian spaces.
4. Lights which flash, move, revolve, rotate, flicker, blink, or vary in both intensity and color
to emit intermittent pulsation shall be expressly prohibited as fixed light sources. This does
not include holiday/seasonal lighting, which is temporary in nature for the holiday/season.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 36
Adopted November 6, 2001
C. Commercial and Industrial Landscaping
Design Character
Plant material selection and placement must ensure safe sight lines to traffic and signs. Care should be
taken that no hazards are created for pedestrians and vehicles by plant litter. Trees and shrubs with
thorns should not be used in or near pedestrian areas. All landscape development for commercial
projects, including specific landscaping elements such as planters, retaining walls and berms must be
specifically approved. Landscaping should accentuate a project design, not hide it from public view.
Requirements:
1. Landscaping design should be compatible with other site improvements and with
neighboring properties.
2. Trees should be massed or grouped together whenever possible to provide a greater visual
impact. Tree plantings may not interfere with utility or drainage easements, and their
location should be based on a function such as screening, shade, view enframement or
accent. Accent plantings should occur at locations such as building entries, parcel entries,
or pedestrian areas. Evergreen locations should consider shading sidewalks in winter to
avoid creating hazardous icing conditions, as well as avoiding south facing windows that
may be impaired to solar access.
3. Not less than 50% of the useable open space area required, shall consist of pervious
landscaped areas. The remaining useable open space requirements may be satisfied by
impervious patio or mall type areas containing seating, decorative fountains, planters,
recreational amenities and similar type facilities.
4. Consideration should be given to use of landscape material for snow fencing, visual
screening and wind breaks when applicable. Hedges, in winter, become snow fences and
must be placed accordingly.
5. Plant materials should be adaptable to the area and selection and placement should include
Consideration of function and color coordination. A list of recommended plant species that
are compatible with various climate zones found in the Town is attached in Appendix 1.
No noxious weeds, as listed in Appendix 2, shall be permitted for use in the Town.
6. Grasses should be used close to pedestrian areas where visual relief from extensive
M pavement is desired, or, in large open areas as a soils stabilizing agent for visual effect
' (primarily viewed from vehicular traffic). All grass sod shall extend to the property line or,
where adjacent to a roadway, to the bottom of adjacent drainage ditches or back of curb, as
applicable. Fire Resistant landscaping in areas with wildfires are required.
7. In large open areas numerous grass mixes should be considered depending on water
requirements and availability, maintenance requirements, potential fire hazard of dry grass,
and visual effect desired. In these areas, rough grass mixes should be utilized. Native
grasses and wildflower mixes require less water, less mowing and lend themselves well to
the perimeter areas of the Town Center blending into the existing vegetation.
8. An automatic irrigation system is required to reduce losses and for ease of maintenance.
The landscaping site plan must include, at a minimum, a note regarding the proper
installation of an automatic irrigation system, its maintenance, and intended use.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 37
Adopted November 6, 2001
n
Well placed landscaping on a commercial projects accentuates the project features.
Fencing and Screening
All commercial service areas are to be screened from adjacent land uses by architectural features such
as solid four-foot or six-foot fences, and/or heavily massed plant materials. All fences, whether
decorative or for screening must be constructed of wood; masonry walls will only be considered if they
are designed as an integral component of the building's architecture. Buffering may be required by
architectural features if excessive noise levels are anticipated or encountered.
Requirements:
1. Loading and unloading facilities must be separated from employee, customer and visitor
circulation and parking areas wherever feasible. All service areas, loading and unloading
docks must be screened from public view.
2. Ground-mounted equipment such as power transformers and air handling equipment must
be screened from public view by either materials integral with the building, a fence or
landscaping, all of which must be specifically approved for the site. Trash dumpsters shall
be screened by a six-foot fence or wall similar in character to the adjacent structure, with
access gates as necessary.
3. Fence materials shall be compatible with the site and the materials of the structures on the
site. Fencing may be used in combination with plant materials. In all cases, however, plant
materials must be used to screen utility boxes. Meters, phone pedestals, and transformers
will occur to the side and rear of the building whenever possible and be appropriately
screened.
4. No wall, fence, or planter in excess of two-feet in height should be constructed or
maintained nearer to the front lot line than the front building setback line. No front, side or
rear fence, wall or hedge may be more than six-feet in height.
5. Fences should be either one of three types in commercial areas: two (split) rail open fences,
four-foot solid fence, or a six-foot solid fence. No chain-link permitted.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 38
Adopted November 6, 2001
S
1
Al
T1 -- r I
Pie
on 11 mn Mae-
-..Two Flail Open
our font G?oscd
S%x Foot Ooscd ,
Erosion Control
M Erosion control is essential at all building sites. Design plans must indicate the type, method, and
placement of erosion control structures on the property. A surety may be required to ensure proper
installation and maintenance of these items. All commercial projects will need to reference the Avon
Master Drainage Stuff, available in the Community Development Department for minimum
requirements.
Retaining Walls
The limited use of retaining walls is encouraged. Whenever possible, retaining walls should be
utilized only in those areas of a site where finished grades cannot meet recommended standards. Small
retaining walls using natural stone boulders are encouraged for use and design with site landscaping.
Requirements:
1. Retaining walls shall be constructed of permanent type materials such as concrete, gabions,
reinforced earth, etc. railroad ties are not acceptable. Retaining wall design details may be
required for design review.
2. Walls over 4 feet high shall be structurally designed or certified by a licensed engineer
(P.E.). A series of lower retaining walls with landscaped terraces is preferable to a high
wall with an unbroken vertical face.
i umi ui mvun nesiaenaai, L;ommerciai, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 39
Adopted November 6, 2001
D. Commercial and Industrial Miscellaneous Items
Accessory Structures
Requirements:
1. Temporary structures including construction storage and office trailers, and tents shall not
be allowed except as may be determined to be necessary during construction.
2. Permits for allowed temporary structures may be issued by the Community Development
Department as a minor modification/minor project without review by the Commission.
Permits shall run concurrent with building permit.
3. Any accessory structures on the building site shall be compatible with the design and
materials utilized for the main building structure. Permits for accessory structures may be
issued by the Community Development Department as a minor modification/minor project
without review by the Commission.
4. Accessory structures must be shown on the final design site plan, and should generally be
attached to the main building. The method of attachment should be generally compatible
with the overall architectural design.
Signs
Well-designed and constructed signs attract attention, create a sense of quality and contribute to the
overall urban character of the Town. In general, all signs must conform to the Town of Avon sign
code unless otherwise conforming to another approved Master Sign Program. All building mounted
signs should be located on a fascia or architectural detail designed for such purposes. Freestanding
identification signs should reflect the architectural character of the building. Flush mounted signs are
encouraged with projecting signs allowed to any adjacent walkway or pedestrian mall.
Requirements:
1. No signs, billboards, or other advertising of any kind shall be erected constructed, or
maintained on any lot or structure unless approved in accordance with the provisions
contained in the Sign Code of the Town of Avon (Section 15.28.00).
Communications & Satellite Dish Antennae
Satellite dishes are permitted in commercial areas, however, with restrictions on screening these dishes
from neighboring properties and prominent views. Screening may be accomplished through the
placement on a building, however, a separately built fence/screen may not be used.
Requirements:
1. All antennas shall be located so as to be screened from view from any public right-of-way
or neighboring property. Screening may be accomplished by, or through the use of
landscaping materials, existing structures, sub-grade placements or other means that both
screen the antennas and appear natural to the site.
2. All wiring and cable related to antennas installation shall be installed underground or be
incorporated entirely within the structure.
3. Color selection for dish antennas should blend with the site and structure. Unpainted
surfaces and dish antennas with reflective surfaces shall not be allowed, and surfaces are
required to be painted to match adjacent trim surfaces. No advertising, logos or
identification shall be allowed on any dish antenna.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design rteview tauiueunes ayo
Adopted November 6, 2001
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
i
Above Ground Tanks and Miscellaneous Structures
Requirements:
1. Oil, gasoline or liquid petroleum gas tanks will not normally be permitted on or above
ground. Temporary installations for a period not exceeding 2 years may be approved
provided the installation complies with all applicable regulations and is fully screened from
view from all public rights-of-way and neighboring properties.
2. No outdoor clotheslines, trash receptacles, or storage areas will be permitted unless
screened.
3. Screening details shall be reviewed and approved by the Commission prior to installation.
4. Flues, vents, chimneys, and other mechanical penetrations of a roof on any structure shall
be fully enclosed and screened in such a manner as to conform with the overall design
character, and equipped with spark arrestors.
!
own or Avon Hesiclential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 41
Adopted November 6, 2001
6. Application and Processing
Submittal and Review Process
The Design Review process is broken down into three distinct tiers: Pre-application Meeting,
Sketch Plan Review, and Final Design Review. Community Development shall review all
material submitted for either of the three design review tiers to determine whether an applicant has
met the minimum submittal requirements prior to the scheduling of a meeting or public hearing.
Minimum submittal requirements are attached as a `checklist' for each required application, and
should be reviewed carefully.
For Sketch and Final Design Review, if the application and supporting material is found to be
inadequate, the Community Development Department shall not schedule the application for
consideration by the Commission but shall notify the applicant of any inadequacies. Such notice
will be provided in writing within 7 days of receipt of application.
The following outlines the entire design review application process:
Pre-application Meeting
The applicant shall prepare at least two (2) copies of the following for staff review and comment
prior to Pre-application Meeting:
1. A Survey of the property, prepared by a licensed surveyor, showing property
boundaries, area, easements, building setbacks, building envelopes, topography (at 2'
intervals @ 1"=20' eng. scale), and any significant natural features such as
watercourses, mature tree stands, and rock outcroppings.
2. A Conceptual Site Plan, Architectural Plan, and Proposed Elevations (1/4"=1'0" arch.
scale) including all property boundaries, proposed building footprints, easements, and
driveways.
The applicant is requested to bring the specific information itemized above to a scheduled pre-
application meeting with staff for review. The intent of this meeting is to provide sufficient
direction for the applicant to be prepared to submit a Sketch Plan that meets all requirements.
Sketch Plan Review
The applicant shall submit four (4) hard line copies of the following for a Sketch Plan Review:
1. A Survey of the property, prepared by a licensed surveyor (stamped and signed),
showing property boundaries, area, easements, building setbacks, building envelopes,
topography (at 2' intervals @ 1"=20' eng. scale), and any significant natural features
such as watercourses, mature tree stands, and rock outcroppings.
2. A Site Plan (1"=20' eng. scale) which clearly indicates existing and proposed grades, all
property boundaries, proposed building footprints, easements, driveways and proposed
driveway grades, limits of site disturbance, all building ridgeline elevations, and any
proposed detention structures.
3. Architectural Drawings (at 1/4"=1'0 arch. scale) which clearly indicate dimensioned
floorplans, exterior elevations with all ridge and grade elevations labeled, roof plans,
material placement and use, overall building dimensions, and building height
calculations.
A specific `Minimum Sketch Plan Review Submittal' (Appendix 3a) checklist is provided with the
application, and the applicant is requested to review and check each item carefully to ensure a
complete application prior to submittal.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 42
Adopted November 6, 2001
00
lkft
f
it,
4
4
4
4
i
4
t
4
i
t
4
'PA
Final Design Review
The applicant shall submit four (4) hard line copies of the following for a Final Design Review:
1. A Survey of the property, prepared by a licensed surveyor (stamped and signed),
showing property boundaries, area, easements, building setbacks, building envelopes,
'
topography (at 2
intervals @ 1"=20' eng. scale), and any significant natural features
su
h
c
as watercourses, mature tree stands, and rock outcroppings.
2. A Site Plan (1"=20' eng. scale) which clearly indicates existing and proposed grades, all
property boundaries, proposed building footprints, easements, driveways and proposed
® driveway grades, limits of site disturbance, temporary/construction trailers, all building
ridgeline elevations, and any proposed detention structures
.
3. An Architectural Plan (at 1/4"=1'0 arch. scale) which clearly indicates dimensioned
floorplans, exterior elevations with all ridge and grade elevations labeled, roof plans,
material placement and use, overall building dimensions, and building height
calculations.
4. A Landscaping Plan (1"=20' eng. Scale) which clearly indicates existing and proposed
grades, all proposed landscaping locations, landscaping materials employed, irrigation
t
i
sys
em (not
ng minimum use and approximate area), erosion control placement and
type, and any required revegetation for disturbed areas (by type and placement).
5. A Color Board that clearly indicates all materials employed on the exterior of the
structure, including but not limited to: siding, stucco, wood, finishes, paints and stains
r ,
roof materials, window and door type and casement colors, and soffit and fascia
t
reatments. All materials will be indicated with a representative sample from the
manufacturer, including the model number/name, and shall be keyed to placement on
the Architectural Plan elevations. Color Board must be no larger than 81/2 x 11(Please
reference Appendix 6).
} 6. A Lighting Fixture Cut-Sheet, provided by the manufacturer of the product, which
clearly indicates the type of fixture being used. All lighting shall be keyed to placement
on the Architectural Plan.
7. A colored elevation of the design submittal, as closely as possible representing the type,
i placement, and accurate representation of materials being employed.
' A specific `Minimum Final Design Review Submittal' (Appendix 3b) checklist, in addition to
minimum requirements of the Pollution Control Plan and Stormwater Control Plan/Drainage
Design Manual, is provided with the application and the applicant is requested to review and check
each item carefully to ensure a complete application prior to submittal.
Applicants are encouraged to ask staff for direction or clarification with the minimum submittal
requirements at any time. Additionally, the minimum submittal checklist may be updated on
occasion, so applicants are encouraged to contact the Community Development Department to
ensure that they are utilizing the most recent checklist available.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 43
Adopted November 6, 2001
7. Planning and Zoning Commission Review
The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the application and supporting material and shall
approve, conditionally approve, deny approval or continue the design review of the project within 45
days of the date of the meeting at which the complete application and supporting material is first
reviewed by the Commission. If the Commission determines that advice or assistance of professional
consultants is needed, or that additional information is required from any source, an additional 45 days
shall be permitted for action by the Commission.
General Approval Criteria
All applications must meet the following general regulatory and planning criteria to be approved:
1. The project complies with the Town of Avon Zoning Regulations,
2. The project has general conformance with Goals and Policies of the Town of Avon
Comprehensive Plan, and any sub-area plan which pertains, and
3. There exist adequate development rights for the proposed improvements.
Sketch Plan Approval Criteria
The Commission and Staff shall evaluate the design of all sketch plan projects utilizing the specific
Design Standards, and by using the following general criteria:
A. The conformance with setbacks, massing, access, land use and other provisions of
the Zoning Code.
B. General conformance with Sections A through D of these guidelines, the design
philosophy, and design intentions listed herein.
Sketch plan approvals shall not be vested, but may be applied towards the submittal of a final design
plan for up to six (6) months.
Final Design Plan Approval Criteria
The Commission shall evaluate the design of all final design plans utilizing the specific Design
Standards, and by using the following general criteria:
A. That the final design plan is in compliance with all sketch plan approval criteria and
with all final design plan submittal requirements.
B. 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.
C. 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.
D. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the
vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired.
E. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals,
Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon.
Final Design Plan approval shall be valid for a period of two (2) years from the date of approval,
with an one-time extension permitted for up to one year at the applicant's request.
f
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 44
Adopted November 6, 2001
1
1
1
Basis for approval or denial of project design
If the design of any project is found to comply with the purposes prescribed in these Guidelines,
Regulations, and any applicable Ordinances of the Town of Avon, and the design guidelines review
criteria prescribed in Section 7 of these Regulations, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall
approve the project.
If the Commission determines that a conflict exists with the purposes Design Guidelines, or any
other provision of these Regulations, or any Ordinance of the Town of Avon which would prevent
approval of such project, the Commission shall disapprove the project.
If the Commission determines that conflicts exist which are subject to correction, the Commission
may conditionally approve or request changes to conform with the Design Guidelines or other
provisions of those regulations. Any disapproval, conditional approval or request for changes shall
be in writing and shall specifically describe the purpose, statement, or design guidelines with which
the design of the project does not comply and the manner of noncompliance. Notification of an
application decision shall be made by the recording secretary and transmitted in writing to the
applicant within 7 days of said meeting.
Compliance Deposit
At such time as the Final Design Plan is approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and
before a building permit is issued for the same project, a compliance deposit shall be required to be
deposited with the Town of Avon to provide security for the Owner's full and binding performance
to the approved Final Design Plan.
The amount of the compliance deposit shall be equal to either: 1) Two percent (2%) of the
valuation cost of construction as submitted in the building permit application, or, 2) A minimum of
$5,000 dollars. Additionally, the compliance deposit shall be submitted as cash, certified check, or
letter of credit.
Time limitations
The time limitations contained in these Regulations shall be interpreted as requiring the
Commission to conduct a review or make the determinations or decisions required by these
Regulations. Failure of the Commission to act within the prescribed time limitations shall be
considered as conditional approval for design of the project subject to conformance with all
applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon.
Scheduling
The length of the development review process from the acceptance of a complete application by
Staff to the actual hearing, shall provide the Town with a minimum review time of 21 working
days. Scheduling requirements, timelines, and commitment goals are available in the office of
Community Development, and may be updated periodically.
A `fast track' review process is available to those plans that are determined by the Community
Development Staff to be in compliance with the Town's development standards at the pre-
application meeting. Contact the Community Development Department for scheduling.
Meetings
The Commission shall regularly meet on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at the time and
location designated on the official meeting agenda. The Chairman may call special meetings of the
Commission when deemed necessary. A notice and agenda of each meeting shall be posted in the
official posting places of the Town at least 48 hours prior to any meeting of the Commission. All
meetings of the Commission shall be open to the public. The printed Record of Proceedings,
vwn yr hvon riesiaennai, commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 45
Adopted November 6, 2001
prepared by the Recording Secretary and approved by vote of the Planning & Zoning Commission,
shall constitute the only official record of Commission meetings. All records, including
proceedings of meetings, applications for review, plans, reports and resolutions shall be maintained
in the Community Development Department by the Recording Secretary of the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Notification of Action by Commission
Within 10 working days following action of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the
Commission's decision to approve, conditionally approve, deny approval or continue design review
licant and his designated agent by first class mail, and
ded to the a
f
ll b
pp
orwar
e
of a project, sha
posted in a conspicuous manner in the Community Development Department. The decision shall
become final if no written appeal is made to the Town Council by any aggrieved person within 30
days following the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
Scope of Approval
All approvals are site specific. Variations and changes, without Commission approval, are not
allowed, except as otherwise provided in these regulations.
Appeals
A decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission may be appealed to the Town Council by the
applicant or any aggrieved person or at the request of the Mayor at any time before the decision
(30) days following the filing
ore than thirt
t
N
i
y
m
o
ng).
becomes final (within 10 days after a hear
of an appeal, the Town Council shall review the action of the Planning and Zoning Commission.
The Town Council shall, in writing, confirm, modify or reverse the decision of the Commission
t
i
f
en
ic
within thirty (30) days following the commencement of review. If it deems insuf
information is available to provide the basis for a sound decision, the Town Council may postpone
final action for not more than thirty additional days. Failure of the Council to act within thirty
additional days shall be deemed a granting of the approval, unless the applicant consents to a time
extension.
Any decision by the Town Council which results in disapproval of the Planning and Zoning
Commission decision shall specifically describe the reasons for disapproval.
Term of Design Approval
Final design approval for a project, as prescribed by these regulations, shall lapse and become void ,
two (2) years following the date of final approval unless a building permit for project construction
ears following final design approval, the final
ore than 2
i
i
y
res m
t exp
is issued. If a building perm
design approval also lapses and becomes void.
The applicant may apply only once to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval of a
maximum extension of one (1) year for any final design approval. Sketch plan approvals may not
be renewed, since they represent only conceptual plans that shall not be considered valid towards a
final design submittal beyond six (6) months from the date of approval.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 46
Adopted November 6, 2001
8. Miscellaneous Regulations
Application Submittal Checklist
Community Development staff shall review all application material submitted for design review to
determine whether an applicant has met the requirements as outlined in the checklist. If the
material is found to be adequate, the application and supporting material will be placed on the next
available agenda and presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission in accordance with these
guidelines.
If the application and supporting material are found to be incomplete or inadequate, the application
will not be placed on the agenda. The applicant will be notified of the inadequacies within 7 days
of the date application is received.
Special Submittal Requirements For Residential, Industrial, and Commercial
Projects
The Commission may require the submittal of a mass model, samples of proposed exterior building
materials and color finishes, charts, graphs and other exhibits to determine impact of proposed
project on solar and view corridors of adjacent properties, and any additional studies or information
required for a complete review of the application.
Models and other special submittals must be available for review by Community Development
staff at least one week prior to the scheduled Planning & Zoning Commission meeting.
Enforcement & Fines
The Department of Community Development, the Police Department of the Town of Avon, and the
Eagle River Fire Protection District shall be responsible and are both hereby jointly charged with
the enforcement of the provisions of these regulations.
Fines of $100 per violation of any term or condition of these regulations or any final design
approval may be imposed by the Town of Avon. The owner shall pay any fine imposed under
these regulations within one week (7 days) after written notice has been received.
Amendment
® These Procedures, Rules and Regulations and any proposed amendments thereto shall be submitted
by the Commission to the Town Council who, through publicly held meeting, shall approve the
' Rules or Amendment and direct their adoption by the Commission or disapprove the proposal with
' directions for revision and resubmission.
Adoption
f The Commission shall adopt and promulgate these Procedures, Rules and Regulations as well as
any Amendments thereto immediately following the approval of these Residential. Commercial
and Industrial Desien Guidelines Procedures Rules and Regulations by the Town Council.
Severability
If any provision of this Regulation or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held
i invalid by a court of law, such invalidity should not affect other provisions or applications of this
Regulation which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application and to this end
9 the provisions of this Regulation are declared to be severable.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 47
Adopted November 6, 2001
Appendix 1: Recommended Plant List
Evergreen Trees minimum planting height 6 feet
Engleman Spruce Picea englemanni
Colorado Blue Spruce Picea pungens Not for extremely dry locations
Bristlecone Pine Pinus aristata Pines need well drained soils
Lodgepole Pine Pinus contorta latifolia
Ponderosa Pine Pinus ponderosa scopulorum
Rocky Mountain Juniper juniperous scopulorum & var. Available in native form or a wide
selection of varieties offering different
size, shape and foliage colors
Deciduous Trees minimum planting size 2 inch caliper
Amur Maple Acer ginnala
Box-elder
Acernegundo
Norway Maple & varieties Acer platanoides & var
Silver Maple
European Birch varieties
Common Hackberry
Russian Olive
Green Ash
Thornless Honeylocust
Varieties: Shademaster,
Skyline, Imperial
Crabapple varieties
Varieties: Hopa, Dolga,
Sargents
White Poplar
Quaking Aspen
Cottonwood Species
Shubert Chokecherry
European Mountain Ash
Acer saccharinum
Betula pendula & var.
Gelds occidentalis
Elaeagnus angustifolia
Fraxinus pennsylvanica
lanceolate
Gleditsia triacanthos inermis
Malus var.
Populus albs
Populus tremuloides
Populus sp. Species:
augustifolia & sargentii
Prunus virginiana "Shubert"
Sorbus aucuparia
There are other more desirable
landscape trees, but may be useful in
difficult growing conditions
in protected locations with adequate
deep soil moisture
Mass plantings not recommended
Survival of young trees may be
questionable in exposed situations
Group plantings only
Most dependable large trees
Survival of young trees may be
questionable in exposed situations
Ever reen Shrubs minimum planting size: 5 gallon
Pfitzer Juniper Juniperous chinensis
"Pfitzeriana"
Chinese Juniper varieties Juniperous chinensis var.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 48
Adopted November 6, 2001
Prostrata Juniper
varieties
Tammy Juniper
Bird's Nest Spruce
Swiss Mountain Pine
Mugho Pine
Juniperous horizontalis var.
Juniperous sabina
tammariscifolial
Picea abies nidifomis
Pinus mugo
Pinus mugo mughus
Snow cover may be desirable for winter
hardiness
Deciduous Shrubs minimum planting size: 5 gallon
Serviceberry Amelanchier
Japanese Barberry Berberis thunbergi var.
varieties
Siberian Peashrub
Red Osler Dogwood
Peking Cotoneaster
Winged Euonymus
Caragana arborescens
Comus stolonifera
coloradensis
Cotoneaster acutifolia
Euonymus alatus
Wintercreeper Euonymus Euonymus vegetus 'Coloratus'
Forsythia
Common Privet
Zabel Honeysuckle
Tatarian Honeysuckle
Oregon Grape
Forsythia intermedia
Ligustrum vulgare
Lonicera korolkoui "Zabel"
Lonicera tatarica
Mahonia aquifolium
Potentiila varieties
Purple-leaved Sand
Cherry
Nanking Cherry
Russian Almond
Skunkbush Sumac
Alpine Currant
Harison's Yellow Rose
Redleaf Shrubrose
American Elder
Ural False Spirea
Froebel Spires
Thunberg Spirea
Vanhoutte Spirea
Snowberry
Potentilla var.
Prunus cistena
Prunus tomentosa
Prunus tenella
Rhus trilobata
Ribes alpinum
Rosa hadsonii
Rosa rubrifolia
Sambucus canadensis
Sorbaria sorbifolia
Spiarea bumalda
Spiraea thunbergi
Spiraea vanhouttei
Symphoricarpos albus
laevigatus
Hardiness may be questionable in
exposed situations
Need good mulch or snow cover to
insure winter hardiness
Hardiness may be questionable in
exposed situations
I own of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 49
Adopted November 6, 2001
Indian Currant Coralberry
Persian Lilac
Common Lilac
Wayfaringtree viburnum
European Cranberrybush
Symphorearpos orbiculatus
Syringa laciniata persica
Syringa villosa
Vibumum lantana
Vibumum opulus
Ground Covers
Carpet Bugle Ajuga reptans Most ground covers will require snow
cover or mulch to insure winter hardiness
Goutweed
Aegopodium variegatum
Most ground covers will require snow
cover or mulch to insure winter hardiness
Snow-in-Summer
Leadwart
Wintercreeper Euonymus
Mint
Goidmoss Stonecrop
Orange Sedum
Two-Row Stonecro
White Clover
Cerastium tomentosum
Ceratostigma plumbaginofdes
Euonymus vegetus
"Coloratus"
menthe spicata
Sedum acre
Sedum kamtschaticum
Sedum spurium
Trifolium repens
Lawn Grasses
Common Kentucky Poa pratensis
Bluegrass
Merion Kentucky
Bluegrass
Park Kentucky Bluegrass
Manhattan Perennial
Ryegrass
Pennfine Perennial
Ryegrass
Fescue
Varieties: Creeping Red
Fescue, Pennlawn.
Poa pratensis "Merton"
Poa pratensis "Park"
Lolium perenne "Pennfine"
Lolium perenne "Pennfine"
Festuca rubra commutata Use only as a mix with Kentucky
Bluegrass
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 50
Adopted November 6, 2001
APPENDIX 2: Town of Avon Prohibited Noxious Weeds
Common Name Scientific Name USDA Code
Leafy Spurge Euphorbia esula L. SUES
Russian knapweed Centaurea repens L. CERE6, ACRE3
Diffuse knapweed Centaurea diffusa Lam. CEDI3
Spotted knapweed Centaurea maculosa L. CEMA4
Musk thistle Carduus nutans L. CANUM2
Canada thistle Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. CIAR4
Plumeless thistle Carduus acanthoides L. CAAC
Scotch thistle Onopordum acanthium L. ONAC
Houndstongue Cynoglossum officianle L. CYOF
Whitetopfl-loary cress Cardaria draba L. CADR
Yellow toadflax Linaria vulgaris P. LIVU2
Dalmatian toadflax Linaria damatica (L.) LIDAM
Wild caraway Carum carvi L CACA19
Scentless(Corn) chamomile Anthemis arvensis L. ANAR6
kn„ awvc nuou weeus are requtrea management in Nagle County through the provisions of The Colorado
Weed Management Act, Title 35, Article 5.5-107 and through Eagle County Resolution No. 2000-45)
i own of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 51
Adopted November 6, 2001
APPENDIX 3(a): Sketch Design Plan Application & Checklist
SKETCH PLAN
Sketch Plan Fee: S
AT ON
C O L O R A D O
Applicant:
Mailing Address:
Phone #: Fax Cell #:
Owner of Property:
Mailing Address: City: State: 2*.
Phone #: Fax #: Cell #:
Lot: Block: Subdivision:
Project Street Address:
Project Name:
? Addition ? Single Family ? Duplex ? Multi-Family ? Commercial
? Industrial ? Other.
Please Describe Your Project (arch. style, sq. ft., height, materials, colors, unique features):
City: State: zip:
We (1) represent that all information provided to the Town of Avon in connection with this application
as true and correct, that we (I) understand the Town of Avon regulations applicable to this project, and
understand that incomplete submittals will delay application review. Owner designates Applicant as
indicated to act as owner's representative in all application submittals related to this project.
Applicant:
Owner:
(Print Name): (Print Name):
Date: Date:
Community Development Department, P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 (970)7484030 Fax (970)949.5749 Page I of 2
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 52
Adopted November 6, 2001
Reviewed by:
o Complete o Incomplete Date:
Community Development Department, P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 (970)7484030 Fax (970)949-5749 Page 2 of 2
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 53
Adopted November 6, 2001
APPENDIX 3(b): Final Design Plan Application & Checklist
FINAL DESIGN
Final Design Fee: $
AV 0 N
C O L O R A D O
Mailing Address: City: State: Zip:
Phone #: Fax #: Cell M
Owner of Property:
Mailing Address: City: State: Zip:
Phone #: Fax #: Cell #:
Applicant:
i,ot: Block; Subdivision:
Project Street Address:
Project Name:
? Addition ? Single Family ? Duplex ? Multi-Family ? Commercial
? Industrial ? Other.
Please Describe Your Project (arch. style, sq. tit., height, materials, colors, unique features):
We (1) represent that all information provided to the Town of Avon in connection with this application
as true and correct, that we (1) understand the Town of Avon regulations applicable to this project, and
understand that incomplete submittals will delay application review. Owner designates Applicant as
indicated to act as owner's representative in all application submittals related to this project.
Owner:
(Print Name): (Print Name):
Applicant:
Date:
Date:
Community Development Department, P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 (970)748-4030 Fax (970)949-5749
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines
Adopted November 6, 2001
Page 1 of 2
Page 54
Final Desi(ill° Alillinillil
Site plan O Four (4) - 24" x 36" plan sets
? Topographical survey with signed RLS stamp O Color board 81/2" x 1 l"
(all areas over 40% slope shaded) O Exterior lighting fixture cut sheets
? Floor plans O Eighteen (18)11"x 17" plan sets - one week prior
O Building elevations (all elevations) to P&Z meetings
? Landscape Plan O Colored elevations - one week prior to P&Z meetings
? Construction sta plan
?North arrow & scale (1-10' or 20') ? Existing utility lines, manholes, transformers,etc
? Vicinty map with adjacent lots ? Driveways, parking and turnarounds
?Title block ? Driveway grades (spot elevations)
? Property lines w/bearings and distances ? Stream, if applicable
? Setback lines (labeled and dimensioned) O Riparian zone/wetlands, if applicable
O Easements (labeled And diment ? Fire hydrants (location on site or distance and
O Adjacent rights-of-way direction from a known point)
? Existing topography (dashed lines) ? Culverts, ditches, detention, etc.
extended through building ? Utility service lines (general locations)
? Proposed grading (solid lines) O Snow storage area (include sq. footage)
? Limits of site disc uu uum ? Walkways, stairs (dimensions)
? Building footprint with roof plan and ridgeline ? Building and area lighting, by type
elevations and driplines (dimensioned to p.l.) O Fencing, retaining walls (including specific
? On-site deteention structures, if applicable materials & colors, T.O.W. & B.O.W. elevations)
? Significant landforms/outcroppings O Trash enclosures
O Exis ' structures 0 Wall sections ifretainin walls prqpo
O Current zoning ? Garage and surtiace parking spaces available
? Number of dwelling units Cl Area and % of site > 40% slope
? Floor area for each dwelling unit ? Area and % of building lot coverage
O Total floor area of all units O Area and % of site landscaped
I
? Building height allowed and proposed a Area and % of paved surface
? Off-street aces and sed ''I
O Floor plain, dimensions and areas O Location of address(es) on building or site
O Building elevations (labeled) ? Location of exterior lighting fixtures, by type
O Natural and finished grades for all elevations (numeric) ? Materials and colors labeled on elevations
?Numeric elevation of all roof ridgelines ? Summary table of specific materials and colors
a Utili meter locations
O Location ofplantings O Plantings summary table
O Location of existing shrubs and trees ? Sprinkler system type and description
O Existing veg
O Polution Control Plan that conforms to Appendix 4 of the Design Review Guidelines
Reviewed by: ? Complete u Incomplete Date:
Community Development Department, P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 (970)748-4030 Fax (970)949-5749 Page 2 of2
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 55
Adopted November 6, 2001
Appendix 4: Pollution Control Plan
6- -- VON
-- O POLLUTION CONTROL PLAN
SMALL RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS
Temporary Pollution controls are Required for all construction projects which
disturb the existing ground surface.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Prior to commencement of any construction, a pollution control plan must be
submitted to, and approved by, the Town of Avon.
Temporary Pollution Control Plan for small residential projects shall consist
of a plan sheet illustrating the location and type of the temporary pollution
controls. The plan shall describe both the management practices and physical _
controls which will be followed during construction. The Pollution Control Plan
shall protect existing drainage structures and waterways such as culverts and storm
sewer inlets from sedimentation. See Figures 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3, for an example of
a small residential project Pollution Control Plan.
Pollution Control Plan shall be prepared by a Licensed Professional Engineer
for Development sites which:
1. Disturb more than '/z acre;
2. Have 50 or more surface parking spaces; or
3. Have slopes greater than 15%.
TEMPORARY POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITIES SHALL BE
INSTALLED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO START OF
CONSTRUCTION.
Pos! Office Box 975
400 Benchmark Road
Arm, Colorado 816211
970-748-4000
970-949-9119 Fur
970-845.7708 TTY
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 56
Adopted November 6, 2001
1'a
a
1
t?
i
I
h .
MaE AST srAke rojmw
PYPE?IOUSt r GRAD BALE
aow ? .
BOW &LES PLACM QV CMM44'r
T#V REPAff4 SyEa PYCKET3r._LR 2WA
STARES I f/2' 70 21' 000 THE- QWt*V,
now
4' hE =44 RACE
DIES
1. 4WAW " be p/dMd W Me tow of it scope or co Ma aaftjotW
and h a mw NM dads f/96W abatthg ffre adjacent beam
Z Mas sf Q# be recurefr arramvd .h P/ooe by etdrar &V stokes
ar rcban affirm thruvgh me bm'R The I&-at stau * in ouch
boh shaft be dfwn tv* wd Gi}e p vW wsfj. fold baste at an
4p* to force the Wow together.
* Was to rw"WT #I Pftv 4 tj;T ftVVgjker & 44Y es(oWl?Y+ed
* Noy "as Moe "be COnt udestr MMtahme d nhg &I*
pas oftellm dwbw"
S. 9dvs Sher bs Mmowd Wh*ft they haw rrrwd Eh*ir Vr*&*rerr
so ae 1112E to A&N* or impede r1WM Aew or abaa%epa
- - - •r..?? o....
MASTER DRAINAGE STUDY
MW OF A VMV
EACLE COUNTY, C04CRADO
03026E
ULM eutt? s/1/x auiwo Na, 4-2
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page
57
Adopted November 6, 2001
F
0 .
a
00
00
l
r
r
f
EXAMPLE -- RE57DDV RAL POLLU 170H COW ROL
MASTER DRAINAGE STUD)'
I-OWN OF A VON
EAGLE COUNTY COLORADO
43026E
vt;rsn WALL --- °"? 3/1/04 outww ?s 4-1 W-M Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 58
Adopted November 6, 2001
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
P
I
I
i
Fs GA Kp arm Al[ C 01
as ACC r,?ac? AL f!9l A NW.
'c (xrur) POSM
off r of "u ripe 2- HAAVM?W snzL
r
is, (wN) mvcr xwr
JrT
-' M Tat C40TH A ANA
Or la' ABOW 641p"
4
r Sam /XM? a.
AW O Mff 04*,aW
NO=
F. SU ANff s. CMU30evabf mehtahed v
Z Jhl or tv A plaow unttp. ovy"Iv&bn
At 400P fit?dt A91 on cpyrodavit oro"
* Mown Nip. AV" A60N be Awtoned 8"Uraiy
to Awes pasts owth whr tfss or slgalrs.
motor abih ,taa0r h* ASIMltd #WCW Wy to
,wr rr WOr Am:* N&h aw Apace$ .vary
40P MW VW
M
IW
* ?
?«*
OO
POOMMAP Of aWadi, Sebb dOCA
ethr M*.V AW be a .d by d' er farofsd
S A "-9"wn&W SGS "vov*4 j*t frlcs may
As bstof or do arlo"phR rho fencer 36W be
a+9wod h avxrdmee wfth the moWftf s7v's *dnftr1GM&
gi r FE?I gr mrALLA now
MASTER DRA/NAZ SMOY
L
727%{9+) OF A VON
EAGLE COUN7% COLORADO J
?' 93Q?AE
uuw n WM S? a"*" NOW *•-3
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 59
Adopted November 6, 2001
Appendix 5: Stormwater Control Plan
Introduction
The objective of this manual is to provide design professionals with the Town of Avon's drainage
requirements. Drainage systems shall be designed to protect public and private property, minimize
maintenance costs and preserve the appearance of roadways and property. This manual outlines the
basic engineering procedures to be used to design and construct stormwater structures and systems.
Designers should use this section as a guideline when preparing drainage plans and reports for the
Town of Avon. If designers feel that the methods outlined in this section are not applicable, another
method may be used if approved by the Town.
Design Standards - Runoff
Drainage structures and facilities in the Town of Avon shall be designed to handle the 25-year rainfall
storm event. Facilities shall also be designed so there will be no major structural damage or loss of life
from the 100-year storm event. Drainage structures beneath or adjacent to arterial (i.e. I-70 and U.S.
Highway 6) and collector streets (i.e. Beaver Creek Blvd., Nottingham, Avon and Metcalf Roads) shall
be designed for the 100-year rainfall event.
Developers of lots adjacent to the Metcalf Gulch, Buck Creek and Swift Gulch (see plan sheets)
drainage pathways are required to maintain the drainage pathway to pass the 100-year storm.
The Town of Avon may require additional drainage requirements for any site which it believes has
special conditions.
Snow Melt
The addition of snow melt runoff is required for stormwater control only. The 25-year snow melt
runoff event shall be used. All other drainage designs can disregard the addition of runoff from snow
melt.
Stormwater Control
A stormwater control plan and facility is required for sites with:
1. 25,000 square feet of impervious surface, or
2. Having fifty or more surface parking spaces.
Sites shall be designed so the 25-year developed flow rates do not exceed the historic. Detention
facilities should be designed for the major and minor storm event. The major event will be the 100-
year storm and the minor event is the 25-year storm. The facility shall be sized to store volume created
from the difference in historic and developed 25-year storm event. The release rate from the facility
shall not exceed the 25-year historic flow rate. The facility shall have an emergency spillway or
additional outlet for the 100-year storm.
Estimating Runoff
Several methods are available for estimating runoff. Designers should select a method based on the
size of the drainage area and the output information desired.
The Town of Avon will accept the following methods:
1. Rational Method (sites less than 5 acres)
2. Technical Release 55 (TR-55)
Another method may be used provided it is approved in advance by the Town of Avon.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 60
Adopted November 6, 2001
Rational Method
" The rational method may be used to size storm sewers, channels, and other drainage structures which
handle runoff from drainage areas less than 5 acres. This method should not be used for routing
stormwater through a basin or for developing a runoff hydrograph. Drainage basin characteristics
should be fairly homogeneous.
Figure 3-1 illustrates the rainfall intensity-duration curve to be used in the Town of Avon.
Technical Release 55 (TR-55)
TR-55 (210-VI-55, Second Edition, June 1986) is a method developed by the USDA-Soil
Conservation Service to estimate runoff. The Soil Conservation Service has supplemented the TR-55
manual for Colorado to handle its unique drainage conditions. "Procedures for Determining Peak
Flows in Colorado" is in the SCS manual to be used when estimating runoff with TR-55 in Colorado.
There are two methods discussed in TR-55, Peak Discharge and Tabular. Designers need to decide
which method is the most appropriate. The Peak Discharge Method is usually used for small
homogenous watersheds and the Tabular Method is used when a watershed is divided into subareas
and a hydrograph is needed.
Twenty-four (24) hour rainfall amounts to be used in Worksheet 2 of TR-55 are listed in Table 3-1.
r
r
r
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 61
Adopted November 6, 2001
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 62
Adopted November 6, 2001
TABLE 3-1
24-HR RAINFALL AMOUNTS
Frequency 24 Hr Rainfall (P)
2 - year 1.3 - inches
5 - year 1.6 - inches
10 - year 1.9 - inches
25 - year 2.3 -inches
50 - year 2.6 - inches
100 - year 2.8 - inches
estimating Snow Melt
The snow melt runoff coefficient to be used for the 25-year event is 0.067 cfs/acre. This coefficient is
needed only for stormwater control facilities.
Stormwater Control
Stormwater control is required for sites with 25,000 square feet of impervious surface or fifty or more
surface parking spaces.
Stormwater controls are implemented to keep post-development flow rates from exceeding historic.
This effectively protects downstream properties from increased runoff which generally occurs when
the amount of the impervious surface increases.
Existing drainage systems are to be designed to handle a 25-year storm event; therefore stormwater
control facilities shall be designed so the historic 25-hear flow is not exceeded. The facility does not
need to detain any runoff until the historic 25-year runoff rate is exceeded.
Stormwater control facilities shall be designed for the major and minor storm event. The major event
will be the 100-year storm and the minor event is the 25-year storm. The facility shall have an
emergency spillway or additional outlet for the 100-year storm. The facility shall be sized to store
volume created from the difference in historic and developed 25-year storm event. The release rate
from the facility shall not exceed the 25-year historic flow rate.
Design Methods
One of the most widely used procedures for determining storage volume is the Storage-Indication
Method. This flow routing method consists of a trial and error process based upon the Continuity
Equation. The SCS National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Chapter 17, provides an in-depth
explanation of the subject of flood routing.
A simple but less accurate method for estimating detention storage is the Graphical Storage Method.
This method was developed by SCS and is explained in the SCS TR-55 Manual. This method is
particularly suited for small detention basin designs, preliminary estimates of storage requirements,
and for estimating the required size of temporary facilities. If using the Graphical Storage Method,
failure of the structure must not endanger or result in a loss of life and a calculated storage volume
error of +/-25% must be tolerable.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 63
Adopted November 6, 2001
Open Channel Flow
Developers shall design and construct new or modify existing channels to adequately handle the
required design storm.
Manning's Equation (V= 1.49/nR2/3S 1/2) and the Continuity Equation (Q=VA) should be used to
calculate the velocity and flow capacity of an open channel. After the velocity and capacity of a
i
ty
channel has been calculated, it should be compared to the permissible velocity and maximum capac
of a channel. If the anticipated velocity and capacity is less than the permissible velocity and
maximum capacity, then the channel is considered to be adequate. The maximum permissible velocity
of a grass lined channel shall be 5 feet per second.
Channel linings are required if either the capacity or velocity of a grass-lined channel is not adequate.
Channel linings which stabilize a channel by preventing erosion and increasing capacity must be
properly designed for the anticipated capacity and velocity. See Figure 3-2. Channel linings are
usually classified as either rigid (concrete, asphalt) or flexible (Rock rip rap).
Rigid channels can handle greater capacities and permissible velocities. Flexible channel linings are
less expensive, safer for roadside, self-healing, filter contaminants and permit infiltration, but have a
lower flow capacity and may experience erosion damage.
Culverts and Storm Sewers
i
t
All culverts and storm sewers in the Town of Avon shall be sized to handle the 25-year storm unless
is beneath or adjacent to an arterial or collector street. Culverts and storm sewers beneath or adjacent
to an arterial or collector street must be designed for the 100-year storm. Facilities shall be designed
so there will be no major structural damage or loss of life from the 100-year runoff event.
Designers shall assume developed conditions for any adjacent undeveloped lots. For maintenance
"
"
x 15
no culvert within the Town of Avon should be smaller than 18 inches in diameter (21
reasons
,
arch culverts are acceptable).
To increase the hydraulic efficiency of a culvert (preventing scour at the inlet and undermining at the
outlet) finished ends may be required. Finished ends (in the order of greatest hydraulic efficiency)
include headwalls, flared end sections, mitered ends, and rip rap. Headwalls can be concrete or a
combination of textured concrete and masonry so they not only increase hydraulic efficiency but are
;
aesthetically pleasing.
Designers should check the inlet and outlet control conditions. The maximum allowable headwater
depth from the 100-year storm shall be 1.5 times the culvert diameter, or 1.5 times the culvert rise ,
dimension for shapes other than round. If approved by the Town of Avon, it may be satisfactory to
allow excess water from the 100-year storm to sheet flow across a roadway provided minimal erosion
and property damage will result.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 64
Adopted November 6, 2001 '
I?
y
J
4
411
r
r
1
I
510NE WEIGHT, IN POUNDS
?d 60 600 loco Zoo ' Awn snore
21
20
2r
2t
1 ; qU ???? zv U 400 1 e ? 12000 •1 4001
ff 7 7 1
FOR STONE WEIGHIWG
165 183. PER CV, Fr,
ADA
SU9
PAO PTED FROM REPORT OF
COMMITTE ON SLOPE
TECTION AM. 5pG CIVIL.
ENGI NEERS t?ROC. JUNE 1948
1 I 2 3 4
12:1 cr
bolecn,
4:1
3:1
2:1
a 1e
z
d
w
? IE
a
W
14
tat
W
4
Z
. ? 12
r 10
0
J
41
> 0
6
4
2
Q
ift:t
1:1
t'
r
EOUIVAAI.ENT SPHERICAL. OIAIAETER OF STONE, IW FEET
She at atone that ia(44 tiarrl dfaplactnont tar oartoua orrovilke end rtdt ?tapto_
Rofcreaao: USDOT, Federal Highway xaminictration, Dacign of
ROadcida Drainage Channels, Hydraulic Design Serier.
No. 4, 1477.
RIPRAP 92F BASED ON VELOarY
MAS7FR DRAINAGE .STUD Y
TOM O A VON
EACLE COUNTY, CotORADO
?a Ars Na.: 93028E
I own of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 65
Adopted November 6, 2001
Minimum and maximum velocity must be considered when designing culverts. A minimum velocity
of 3 fps is recommended for a pipe to be self-cleaning. The maximum velocity is dictated by the outlet
channel conditions. An outlet velocity less than 5 fps is recommended for grassed lined channels with
minimal erosion protection. Outlet velocity shall never exceed 12 fps.
Culverts shall be designed to permit free unobstructed passage of debris and silt, or provide for their
deflection and/or collection at a point upstream.
If a battery of pipes is required, a clear space of one-half the pipe diameter (one foot minimum, four
foot maximum) must be provided between pipes.
Cleanout access shall be provided at least every 200 feet for pipes up to 24 inches in diameter and
every 400 feet for pipes larger than 24 inches. Cleanouts are also required at all bends in all pipe sizes.
Submittal Requirements
A stormwater control plan is required for projects which have more than 25,000 square feet of
impervious surface or fifty surface parking spaces. The stormwater control plan must be prepared by a
professional engineer licensed in the State of Colorado. The Town of Avon may require a stormwater
control plan for any site which it feels has special conditions that warrant investigation. The
stormwater control plan shall consist of a plan sheet and report which evaluate the existing and
proposed conditions. The required pollution control plan for the site may be combined with the
stormwater control plan in a single report. The stormwater control plan shall contain the following:
_Plan Sheet
The plan sheet shall include the following:
1. Topographic map (not less than 1"=40') of the site which shows existing and proposed
drainage patterns (i.e. grading plan).
Basin vicinity map (i.e. USGS quad) which shows the limits of the tributary area(s).
Location of proposed streets, driveways, buildings, homes, Parking areas and other
structures.
2. Location, size, slope, and capacity of all drainage structures (i.e. culverts, storm sewers,
drainage channels, inlets, etc.).
3. Expected peak discharge at critical locations (i.e. drainage structures, outfalls, etc.).
4. Sufficient details for construction.
Narrative
The narrative shall include the following:
1. A general description of the project.
2. A description of the existing and proposed land uses.
3. Calculation method with a listing and justification of all coefficients and assumptions
used in the calculations. (All calculations shall be attached to the narrative as an
Appendix).
4. A description of existing, proposed and tributary drainage patterns.
5. A summary of the historic and developed runoff rates and volumes.
6. Description of existing and proposed drainage structures (detention pond, culverts, etc.)
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 66
Adopted November 6, 2001
}
r
t
I!
1
ndix 6:
STET ?? .
D 1 0
PQ box 4324
rdward,, t?R16-57
COLOR BOARD' see other We for descriptions
Exterior Building Materials: Wgdridae Lot 46 - Block 4
Exterior Siding #1:
K'n*llcm 4F9ni.r
Exterior Siding #2
Stu=
Exterior Trim:
Rooing
Exterior Building Materials Palette:
(to resemble attached photo)
PtECEIVED
APR 03 2001
Community De-miupment
W1191 Mir SW 3 3 -P
ik'nrMMtl
t
HW-1iVP
Example Color Board
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 67
Adopted November 6, 2001
h,F, • , 1.
STU.-D10
FD Cox 4526
rrw
i
S0ARA' other eider
ExtWr ENUdIm Mftiift' Wildr6dm logo" - Block 4
Exterior Siding 01: Cedar Sowd & Sa
Stt Arn WWurns: Moneyly*
EXterar Siding d7: Cedar Gapbwd Sidra
Skw*in 11VWWm: Winter WNW
Stucco Porter Paints WbidaUrn*
(medium lexiune to be prmi&W)
Exterior Trim: Cede
Shief"I t Wham:. SeKhwMd
Twme: Stained Canceete
M" C*ir*d Ste
Roofing: Owm Can iag A spalt Sl:ingks
Desert Tyr C,essic
Sum OwNs Caning Cutred Slone
Bucks County Pieldstm
Cokmed Metal Clad Windm' Eau orcow0ard
Fire Engine Red
Garage Moors: Cedar TAG & Planking urf Beedhr ew Stair
Exterior Lighting Fphres. A: ANmiaum Pendant 4 shaded glass
8: Alurrimarn P*ndW w1 sh ad glass
Arroyo Crabman Eve%reen
a Arroyo Crahsman Evergreen PFVz%VV
the Town of
Au w
E; ArrryyoCrabtsman Berkeley Po
1fi ing and
(Vote: Ag Exterior Lghi Fixtures
Obscured glass
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 68
Adopted November 6, 2001
10
1
r
i
1
ndix 7: Example Site Plan
Vj
? 9q
?? ? tea
t. ,
i
/
Note: This example is not intended to suggest building design, site grading, site design, or preferences of the
Town. It is merely to demonstrate the minimum level of detail required for final design site plans.
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 69
Adopted November 6, 2001
Appendix 8: Application and Design Review Fees
Following is the schedule of fees for Design Review applications in the Town of Avon. These fees may be
updated periodically. Please check with the Community Development Department to ensure you have the most
recent fee schedule.
Residential
1 - 3 Units
Up to 3,500 square feet unit size $350
Over 3,500 square feet unit size $500
4 - 9 Units $750
10 - 20 Units $1,000
21 - 40 Units $1,500
41 - 60 Units $2,000
6 -100 Units $2,500
Over 100 Units $3,000
(Residential units within a mixed use projec t are assessed according to the Commercial
fee schedule below.)
Commercial, Industrial, and Mixed Use
up to 1,000 square feet (sq $200
1,000 - 2,499 sf $500
2,500 - 4,599 sf $750
5,000 - 9,999 sf $1,000
10,000 -19,999 sf $1,500
20,000 - 49,999 sf $2,000
Over 50,000 sf. $2,500
Minor Project or Modification to Final Design $75
Non-approved Modification to Final Design 3 X fee
Extension of Final Design Approval '/2 fee
Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 70
Adopted November 6, 2001
0 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
HELD OCTOBER 23, 2001
A regular meeting of the Town of Avon, Colorado was held in the Municipal Building,
400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado in the Council Chambers.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Judy Yoder at 5:30 PM. A roll call was taken
with Councilors Debbie Buckley, Peter Buckley, Mac McDevitt, and Mayor Protem Buz
Reynolds present. Councilors Michael Brown and Rick Cuny were absent. Also present
were Town Manager Bill Efting, Town Attorney Burt Levin, Assistant Town Manager
Larry Brooks, Town Clerk Kris Nash, Human Resource Director Jacquie Halbumt, Police
Chief Jeff Layman, Town Engineer Norm Wood, Recreation Director Meryl Jacobs,
Public Works Director Bob Reed, Director of Community Development Ruth Borne,
Engineer Anne Martens as well as members of the press and public.
Citizen Input:
Employee Bonus Awards:
Mayor Yoder presented Third Quarter Employee Bonus Awards for employees
nominated by other employees for going above and beyond the call of their normal job
duties.
The award winners were:
Steve Hodges, Police Department, for his great police working in solving the case of the
tipping over 10 concrete pillars along Avon Road.
Mike Lundblade, Police Department, for designing a drinking and driving program for 15
year olds in his driver's education classes.
Eric Johnson, Community Development, for doing the work of two people while his
coworker was stuck over seas. The department can count on him to do the job and do it
correctly.
Sarah Stoutenburg-Lai, Recreation Department, for her hard work coordinating the three
special events this summer as well as making sure the closing of the recreation center
went smoothly.
Norman Wood and Larry Brooks, Administration Department, won a team award for
their dedication to Avon and going above and beyond their call of duty.
11
Citizen Input: 0
Fall Fun Night Update:
Mr. Tommy Schneider stated that Fall Fun Night will take place on October 31 from 4
PM to 8 PM in Nottingham Park. He stated it is a safe, fun, non-scary event for families
and children.
Citizen Input:
Appeal of Home Day Care, 2121 B Long Spur, Lot 41, Block 1, Wildridge
Mayor Yoder stated that she will step down from the appeal and Mayor Protem Reynolds
will run this part of the meeting.
Town Attorney Levin stated that the Walkowicz's own a duplex in Wildridge and applied
for a special review use approval to conduct a daycare in their unit. A hearing before the
Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) was held on the application and they
recommended approval. Daycare does meet the criteria for a home occupation in Avon.
Mr. Levin stated that the neighbors, the Carroll's, sent a written appeal to the Town of
Avon, which brings the appeal before the Town Council to decide.
Mr. Levin stated that petitions and letters have been received for and against the issue and
are made a part of the record.
Mr. Rich Carroll, resident of 2121 A Long Spur, which is next door to the daycare,
approached the Council. He stated that the town code states that a home occupation does
not interfere with the parking, access or other normal activities on adjacent properties or
with units in a multi-family dwelling. He stated that there has been three instances so far
that their access has been interfered with. He believes this activity will impede their
normal use of their duplex. He added that he is also concerned with the liability issue and
insurance.
Mr. Carroll stated that the Avon Town Comprehensive Plan states that the plan should be
dynamic and flexible and respond to changes in public attitude, it also states that home
occupations that do not negatively impact other residences should be encouraged. He
added that the Municipal Code states that home occupation does not effect the residential
character of the neighborhood. Mr. Carroll stated that this whole event has greatly
effected public attitudes, has definitely negatively impacted other residences, and has
definitely negatively impacted the character of the neighborhood.
Mr. Carroll stated that the rules under which this was granted states that there are no
employees allowed, however, the State does allow the use of substitutes. Ms. Walkowicz
n
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
sent a letter to the Town stating that she will use substitutes. Mr. Carroll questioned
when a substitute becomes an employee.
Councilor Peter Buckley asked if the daycare clients were to park on the street for the
purpose of dropping off and picking up only, would that mitigate the problem of blocking
the driveway. Ms. Geralyn Carroll stated if they park on the street they will still be
walking in on the same common driveway, again presenting a liability issue.
Mr. Carroll felt the liability issue was a big issue because if a child was injured due to an
accident then everyone is going to get sued. He asked if the Town would do anything to
indemnify the Carroll's from any possible lawsuits. Mr. Levin advised the Council not to
do that.
Mr. Carroll asked if the daycare does get approved, who do they go to to see that all of
the conditions are followed. Mr. Levin stated the Community Development department.
Mr. Carroll stated that their access and normal activity has been effected and will
continue to be effected. He stated that there was a petition presented to the Council with
14 homeowners opposed to the daycare. He asked the Council to uphold the appeal and
not grant the daycare.
Mr. Larry Eskwith, attorney for Shawn Walkowicz the daycare applicant, stated that the
P&Z decision was made after a full investigation of the circumstances by the community
development department of the Town. The P&Z rendered a memorandum that fully
supported a home occupation of a day care in this location. He stated that the Council
must consider the criteria set forth in the zoning code to make this determination. The
special review use provision of the zoning code set forth three criteria: 1. Does this
special review use comply with the zoning ordinance of the Town.; 2. Is it in furtherance
of the Master Plan; 3. Does the home occupation fit in with the character of the
neighborhood.
Mr. Eskwith stated that the neighborhood is perfect for a daycare center because it is a
neighborhood of young families and is filled with children. He said the day care center
will have four children other than the applicant's children. The room that will be used is
in the basement and not near the party wall. He said the children are young and will
spend the vast majority of their time inside the residence. He does not think there is an
issue relating to the creating noise that isn't reasonable in the neighborhood.
Mr. Eskwith stated the State only allows six children to be located in this daycare center
during any given day. The applicant has two children, soon to be three, so there will
only be three more children at the residence. He does not feel the number of customers
will be an issue.
Mr. Eskwith stated that the daycare center will not cause the visible storage of parking
vehicles not normally associated with residential use.
0
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
At
Mr. Eskwith stated that they will not be altering the exterior or interior of the unit.
He stated that the residential character of the neighborhood will not be changed. He
added that it is a residential home occupation and not an industrial or commercial
occupation.
Mr. Eskwith stated regarding interfering with parking, the applicant has the ability to
park five cars on her side of the driveway. There will be no cars parked on the street. He
stated that the parents know not to block the driveway being shared by the two
residences. He added that there is adequate parking everyday for the number of vehicles
that will be there. The cars will arrive at different times everyday to drop off their
children and then leave. They will not be there for long periods of time. He does not see
how this particular use will interfere with parking.
He stated that this daycare will not require alteration of the residence to satisfy Town
code or County health regulations.
He stated that there will be no signage.
Mr. Eskwith stated the only two criteria that are pertinent is the noise issue and the
parking issue. He does not feel they really are issues if you examine them carefully.
Mr. Eskwith felt this is a furtherance of the Master Plan. The Plan encourages home
occupations, especially ones that will cut down on commuting. 0
He stated that it does comply with the neighborhood. He stated that there are a lot of kids
in the neighborhood and this will fit in very nicely in the neighborhood.
Mr. Eskwith stated that they want to make the neighbors happy. They want it to be a
daycare center that fits in with the neighborhood that people will be comfortable with.
He stated that the issue of liability should not be an issue. Ms. Walkowicz submitted a
letter from an insurance agent that states she will have the ability to get liability insurance
over and above homeowners insurance. It also stated that it in no way will effect the
neighbors ability to have insurance. He does not see how liability is increased as there
will be children walking up the driveway in any event.
Mayor Protein Reynolds questioned if a child is hurt in a shared driveway are the people
on the other side held liable, since the driveway is a shared easement and insured by each
owner. Mr. Levin stated that the Carroll's should not have any liability in connection
with the child unless it is done negligently by the Carroll's.
Councilor Buckley asked for more clarification on employees and asked about a
substitute. Mr. Eskwith stated that the only time a substitute would be used is in an
emergency. He stated there will not be anyone running the day care except Ms.
Walkowicz. Mr. Eskwith later clarified that her State license prohibits employees.
11
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
Jl?
J
Councilor McDevitt asked for a plat showing the driveway and the three parking spaces.
He questioned that in the event of snow do the parking spaces get used as snow storage.
He was told not at all. He was shown on a map by Comm. Dev. Director Borne the
parking layout.
Councilor McDevitt clarified where the car was parked that blocked the driveway during
the incident that was earlier referred to by the Carroll's. Ms. Carroll stated in the
common easement area (Ms. Carroll pointed it out on the map). (Note: Discussion took
place away from the microphone and was unable to transcribe). Mr. Eskwith presented a
sign-in sheet from the days in question showing that only one child was present on one of
the days and that no children were present on the other day.
Mr. Eskwith stated that the safety issue is really not an issue. Parents are driving children
to a daycare center at different times. They are not going to be driving in a reckless
fashion that will injure their children or any of the neighborhood children. He added that
it is not that many cars and it will not interfere with the school bus or the garbage trucks.
Mr. Eskwith stated that there are petitions for and against this home occupation. He
stated that the petition for had 27 signatures, most of which came from people who live
on the same street as the day care. He added that there have been numerous letters
written in favor of the home occupation and it shows how much this center and all day
care is needed. The Town should consider how great this need is and what a benefit this
center will be to the town.
Ms. Susan Peterson, resident of 2133 A Long Spur, stated that the Town's
Comprehensive Plan has great visions, but each case should be looked at separately. She
does not think it is advisable to add a business on a cul-de-sac. She feels that parking
will be an issue. She added that the Comprehensive Plan encourages home occupations
that reduce commuting by residents and do not negatively impact other residents. She
stated that there are a significant number of people that live on Long Spur who believe
that they will be negatively impacted. She stated that the plan also states it should be
updated every three to five years, and this plan was approved in 1996. She added that the
pending ordinance to revise the daycare ordinance tells her that they are at the five year
period.
Mr. Morgan Turner, resident of 2455 Old Trail Road, stated that he lives in a four-plex,
next door to a unit that was granted a home day care permit. He stated that even though
the bylaws stated no owner occupation the applicant was granted a permit. He stated that
this has caused the neighbors not to speak to each other. One neighbor has sold and
moved. He added that in the end the daycare was not granted anyway. He said their
rules superceded the application because they were in violation of their own bylaws, yet
the permit was granted. They threatened to take civil action against the applicant and it
ended. Now they have a neighborhood where no one speaks and they don't share
common anything now. He agreed there is a need for day care. When there is a single
dwelling no one is impacted directly. When there is a common wall the communication
process must occur. He said not everyone has to enjoy the noise generated by children.
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
A
He said the process has had a negative impact on their neighborhood so no one speaks.
He said that he will move from his residence. 0
Ms. Wendy Davidson, resident of Eagle-Vail, stated that she is a neighbor of two home
daycares and has no negative impact. She is in support of this daycare application. She
added that there is an extreme need for daycare.
Ms. Ann Him, resident of 2151 Saddle Ridge Loop, presented a letter for the record. She
stated that there is a risk when you buy a duplex, you never know who your neighbors are
going to be. She said you have to live in harmony with your neighbors. She is in favor
of the daycare.
Mr. Doug Cross, resident of 2158 Long Spur, stated that it is great having kids on the
street and can't imagine the whole complaint about kids and the noise. He stated that he
really appreciates the neighbor of his duplex. He felt that there was a lot of pettiness
here. He can't imagine anything negative about kids that age.
Ms. Kristen Joseph, resident of 5164 Long Sun Lane, stated that she is new to the valley
and has to work. She was unable to pursue a job because she did not have child care.
Now that she has found childcare, she is unable to pursue work for fear that this day care
will be closed. She said the valley is in desperate need of childcare. She said children do
make noise, however, that is inevitable. She said that if they do close this daycare
something needs to be done because childcare is difficult to find.
Mr. Brian Nolan, resident of Long Sun Lane, stated this is a lifestyle choice. He thinks
children making noise is a wonderful thing. You buy a duplex and hope for the best
because you don't know what is going to be on the other side. He did commend the new
ordinance requiring approval from the neighbor of a common wall. He said the valley is
in desperate need for childcare, but does not feel it should come to the political level of
the Avon Town Council. He is not in favor of daycare in residential neighborhoods
where variances need to be changed.
Ms. Carroll stated that they have never complained about the noise. She stated that she
knows that daycare is a huge issue and has been for the past 13 years. She stated that the
Comprehensive Plans need to be redone based on the culture of the community. She does
not feel that enforcing a bylaw to do home daycare is going to solve the problem of home
daycare. She does feel that the issue must be looked at as a community and a task force
should be formed to look at this issue in a more diplomatic civilized way.
There being no further comments, Mayor Protem Reynolds closed the public hearing and
opened up for discussion amongst the Council.
Councilor McDevitt asked the Walkowicz's if they went to their adjacent duplex
neighbors and talk to them about it. (Note: Ms. Walkowicz is speaking away from the
microphone and is sometimes unable to transcribe). Ms. Walkowicz stated she contacted
Ms. Carroll in early July at which time her comments were favorable. She stated they
Regular Council Meeting 6
October 23, 2001
talked civilly about it for a long time and then things went awry when she asked for some
documents regarding liability. Ms. Walkowicz stated that she emailed the documents to
her, which Ms. Carroll said she never received. Ms. Walkowicz did not know that and
then when it came time for the meeting, suddenly Ms. Carroll objected.
Councilor McDevitt asked Ms. Walkowicz if she has instructed her clients to park in
designated parking spaces as opposed to a shared entryway. She stated that they all know
to park directly in front of her garage, they also come at different times. She stated that
she has never seen a car park in the middle where no one can get in or out.
Councilor Peter Buckley confirmed that the total number of cars at any given time is
three. Ms. Walkowicz stated that is correct and it is only on Monday. Mr. Buckley asked
who was for and who was against the daycare. Seven people were for the daycare and
four people were against the daycare.
Mayor Protem Reynolds stated that he has seen this issue come in numerous times while
serving on the P&Z Commission and the Town Council. He finds it hard that his
neighbors are having such a hard time dealing with children. He hates to see government
having to make more laws, but is really in favor of having this law changed so they don't
have this situation brought before the Council again.
There being no further comments from the Council, Mayor Protem Reynolds asked for a
motion.
Councilor Peter Buckley motioned to approve the application for the daycare. Councilor
McDevitt seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Councilor Peter Buckley added that there is an ordinance on the agenda tonight that will
require approval of the common wall neighbor that he is going to vote in favor of. This
will solve the situation neighbor to neighbor, where he feels it belongs, instead of coming
to the Council.
Ordinances:
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-12, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Approving the
Barrancas Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Lots 38, 40, and 41, Block 1,
Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
Mayor Yoder stated this is a public hearing.
Community Development Director Borne stated Tanavon Corporation is proposing 45
units on Lots 40 and 41, Lot 38 will be designated open space, which will be conveyed to
the Town. Staff recommends approval.
?J
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
Councilor McDevitt confirmed that two access points with turning lanes were included.
He questioned how many cars could be in each lane. Ms. Borne stated that issue will be
resolved at final design because they have still not submitted final design application.
Mr. McDevitt stated that the lanes have to allow for the maximum number of cars, and no
one ever going up the hill should ever have to wait for someone making a left turn.
There being no further comments, Mayor Yoder closed the public hearing.
Councilor Debbie Buckley motioned approval of Ordinance No. 01-12, Series of 2001 on
second reading. Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion.
Mayor Yoder asked for a roll call.
The motion carried unanimously.
Ordinances:
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-13, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Amending
Chapter 17.48 of the Avon Municipal Code Relating to Home Occupations/Child Day
Care
Mayor Yoder stated this is a public hearing.
Town Attorney Levin stated this ordinance amends the daycare requirements. Minor
modifications were made prior to second reading to include language stating that daycare
in a duplex requires consent in writing from the people living on the other side of the
duplex. Applicants living in a multi-plex require the consent of the owners sharing the
common walls.
There being comments from the public, Mayor Yoder closed the public hearing.
Councilor Peter Buckley motioned approval of Ordinance No. 01-13, Series of 2001, on
second Reading. Councilor Debbie Buckley seconded the motion.
Mayor Yoder asked for a roll call.
The motion carried unanimously.
Ordinances:
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-14, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Concerning the
Annexation to the Town of Avon, Colorado, of Certain Property as Described in the
McGrady Acres Petition for Annexation
11
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-15, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Approving an
Agreement Concerning the Terms of Annexation, Development and Subdivision of the
Lands Described in the McGrady Acres Petition for Annexation; Authorizing and
Instructing the Mayor of the Town of Avon to Sign the Agreement on Behalf of the
Town; and Approving a Site Specific Development Plan Establishing a Vested Property
Right Pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as Amended
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 01-08, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Approving
Zoning for Lots 1, 2, and 3 of a Resubdivision of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of McGrady Acres
Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
Mayor Yoder stated that each ordinance will be voted on separately, but the public
hearing will be held jointly for all three ordinances.
Town Attorney Levin stated the three ordinances will accomplish the annexation of
McGrady Acres, a development agreement for the property, and the zoning on the
property.
Mr. Bill Post, representing the applicant Traer Creek, stated that in 1998 when the
Village at Avon was approved, the vast majority of people insisted that the first thing to
happen was the construction of the I-70 interchange and connection to Highway 6. That
is why he is annexing and developing McGrady Acres. This will put him in compliance
with the original 1998 Annexation and Development Agreement.
Mr. Post stated that it is unfortunate when the public gets against the developer and it
becomes personal and we start attacking things instead of what the real issues are. He
stated that the only outstanding issue in the zoning with the residents of Eaglebend is the
honest difference of opinion of what one of the lots ought to be zoned. He hopes the
people will keep things on a rational basis, because this will be a long project, and not
make things personal.
Mr. Post stated when they started this process several months ago, they sent flyers and
posted the Eaglebend Drive homes to meet with the neighbors to keep them informed.
He stated that after meeting with the residents, they did not want construction crossing at
Stonebridge Drive and we withdrew that. He has agreed to do everything he can to not
run construction traffic down Eaglebend Drive. He agreed to move the rock crusher,
which is required for the interchange development, as far away as physically possible and
agreed to berm and shield it. Then when we got to the point of the McGrady Acres
annexation the people came and said what they really want is a cul-de-sac. Mr. Post said
although he does not agree that it is good planning, he did agree to build it. He also
agreed to build a wall or a fence to separate the property from the Eaglebend residences.
In addition, they agreed not to bring this into the Village at Avon but leave the property
in Avon and leave it up to the Town's P&Z so it is within their control and not the
Village at Avon's control. He said many things he agreed to that he did not have to agree
to. The only thing that he has not agreed to is should the lots next to the new four lane
road be residential or should it be neighborhood commercial, the lowest commercial
Regular Council Meeting
October 23, 2001
zoning that the Town has. He stated that there is an honest disagreement with some of
the residents whether that should be residential or commercial. He still believes the best
zoning is neighborhood commercial. He said that it's not that they have not listened and
worked with the people, but that he disagrees on what the zoning should be.
Mayor Yoder stated that six letters have been received from nine people that will be
entered into the record and they all support the cul-de-sac and most support residential
zoning.
Councilor McDevitt asked Mr. Post to explain what the other lots in the area are zoned.
Mr. Post stated that there are four lots, one located on each corner of the intersection of
what would be Eaglebend Drive and the new Post Blvd. Staff and P&Z both
recommended that Lot 3 and Lot 2 be zoned commercial. There has been no objection to
Lot 2, Lot 3 is the lot in contention. There is also a lot located in the county that has been
rezoned under PUD allowing commercial (overnight cottage rentals). Lot 6 is the other
lot, which is presently zoned residential, but the owner adamantly believes that his lot
should be commercially zoned with the new road running through it. He added that if
Mr. Post is required to build residential, the Lot 6 owner will go to the County for
commercial zoning and not annex into the town. Mr. Post stated that if he is required to
build residential, they will still have commercial on Lot 6.
Mayor Yoder asked Mr. Post if he has the option of going to the County for zoning. Mr.
Post stated that he does and if he goes to the County he will ask for something more
extensive than neighborhood commercial. 0
Mayor Yoder asked the size of Lot 3. Mr. Post stated approximately 1.3 acres.
Mr. Mike Bowen, owner of Lot 6 of McGrady Acres and Lot 1 in Avon, stated that Lot 1
will be his residence. He stated that he and the neighbor across the street are probably the
most impacted by the annexation. He also stated that he is very pleased with the cul-de-
sac. Mr. Bowen stated that his intent was to use Lot 6 as his residence, but with the Traer
Creek annexation and the busy street to come, he now intends to apply for annexation
into the town and then apply for neighborhood commercial zoning if that is what is
received by Mr. Post. If Mr. Post does not receive commercial zoning then he will apply
for commercial zoning through the County. The lot is approximately the same size as
Mr. Post's property.
Mr. Buz Didier, resident of Eaglebend Drive, stated that he wants the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Bruce Drumm, resident of 4570 Eaglebend Drive, requested the consideration of the
cul-de-sac for safety, to preserve the neighborhood, reduce the traffic and noise level,
prevent Eaglebend Drive from becoming a direct route from the Village at Avon project
to the Town of Avon, and discontinue the short cut being used now by locals. He stated
that Eaglebend Drive is not made for heavy traffic and he wants the street to remain a
neighborhood. Mr. Drumm stated that commercial zoning on McGrady Acres should not
be allowed. He stated that homes would butt up adjacent to the commercial zoning. He
Regular Council Meeting 10
October 23, 2001
wants to preserve the neighborhood. Mr. Drumm also stated that he is glad the Village at
Avon is part of the Town of Avon, but questioned how they got their own design review
board. He stated that is a town within a town. He questioned how Traer Creek will
improve the Town of Avon. Mr. Drumm added that Mr. Post stated that if he does not
receive the commercial zoning from the Town that he would go to the County. He asked
if this is going to continue one issue after the other. He does respect and thank Mr. Post
for the things that he has worked out, but asked what is the future of Avon. He does not
want to see the project happen independently of the Town. Mr. Drumm wants the cul-de-
sac and residential zoning.
Councilor McDevitt asked Mr. Drumm if the Council voted to approve residential zoning
then there a possibility that the cul-de-sac won't happen and asked what his comments
are if that happened. Mr. Drumm stated that he wants the cul-de-sac and the residential
zoning and is not willing to give up on that.
Mayor Protein Reynolds stated that he is in favor of keeping Eaglebend Drive open to
make traffic flow more easily through the Town. He does not think that it will become a
main road for the connecting road. Mr. Reynolds stated that Mr. Post has given up a
number of things and now it is time for the residents to realize that they may not get
everything that they want. He said Mr. Post does not want to impose on the residents but
he is trying to work with them. He doesn't know how much more they can ask of him
before he just decides to take it to the County.
Councilor Debbie Buckley stated that her concern is that if he goes to the County there is
a good chance that it could become a through street with neighborhood commercial at the
end of it.
Mr. Bobby Banks, resident of Eaglebend Drive, stated that he is against neighborhood
commercial zoning. He said that if it comes down to a choice, the most important thing
to him is the cul-de-sac.
Ms. Kathleen Walsh, resident of 4755 Eaglebend Drive, stated that when they annexed
the Village at Avon, she requested that their street be made a cul-de-sac at that time. She
stated that the petition that was brought before the Council specifically stated that they
wanted the cul-de-sac with residential zoning. She stated that they should not be the ones
making concessions to the developer.
Ms. Walsh commented on Ordinance No. 01-14 stating that annexing McGrady Acres
makes it a complete development and makes sense. She does not disagree. She did
question how they could annex in part of the Denver Rio Grande railroad right-of-way.
Mr. Munsey Ayers, attorney for Traer Creek, stated that the inclusion of rights-of-way is
included under the Annexation Act and that Traer Creek meets the requisite ownership
requirements for the petition. He stated it is in accordance with Section 107 of the
Statute, which is the Municipal Annexation Act.
C
Regular Council Meeting 1 I
October 23, 2001
Ms. Walsh asked if it was a buildable right of way. Mr. Ayers stated that it is not being
built on, but just being annexed in.
Ms. Walsh stated her concerns on Ordinance No. 01-15 regarding the approval of the
Annexation, Development and Subdivisions Agreement. She felt that the Town has no
protection under the Default, Remedies, Termination paragraph of the agreement. She
said the remedies should favor the Town and not the developer. Ms. Walsh also had
concerns that the agreement was between the Town, EMD Limited Liability Company,
Traer Creek LLC, and Traer Creek Metropolitan District. She questioned when the metro
district had been formed and where are their guidelines. Mr. Post stated it was formed in
1998 and was approved by the Council. He stated there are service plans that set forth
what they can and can not do. Ms. Walsh asked who oversees the District.
Ms. Walsh stated that she is concerned also with the section of the agreement concerning
no obligation to develop. While it would be fine with her if they did not develop the
land, she is concerned if they were to half develop the land.
Ms. Walsh next commented on Ordinance No. 01-08 regarding the zoning of McGrady
Acres. Ms. Walsh stated that they should not be asked to choose between the cul-de-sac
or the zoning. They are just requesting what is already there. She stated that the
ordinance states the proposed uses are compatible with the surrounding area. She said
the surrounding area is residential, there is no commercial area there. She asked the
Council to ask for specifics on what he will build and not give him a general zoning
agreement. She has concerns that he could take out the park on Lot 1 and build employee
housing. Mayor Yoder stated that he can not take out the park.
Ms. Walsh said that Mr. Post is not losing land, but is actually gaining land and taking
part of the park land. She added the town is the one losing land.
Ms. Walsh added that the specifics of the cul-de-sac and the fence need to be decided
before Council finalizes all of the other issues.
Ms. Walsh added that Mr. Post stated that he is losing property because of the easement
or right of way for the lot next door, but that is all easement for utilities anyway. She
stated that is not really buildable.
Mayor Protein Reynolds felt that Ms. Walsh was going on with issues that were very
minute on a grand scale of McGrady Acres. He said that scale is trying to create
something that works for both the residents and the applicant. He is having a hard time
going over such a small issue when they are trying to develop a cul-de-sac, which is what
the residents wanted.
Ms. Walsh stated that the specifics need to be written in.
Councilor McDevitt asked Ms. Walsh if the Council votes to have residential zoning, is
she willing to accept the risk of it being overturned by the County. Ms. Walsh stated yes
0
Regular Council Meeting 12
October 23, 2001
she is because she feels the County would not overturn that. Council confirmed that she
wants both the cul-de-sac and the zoning.
Ms. Christie Ferraro, resident of 3060 Eaglebend Drive, stated that Traer Creek is doing
the development and that they need to take care of the impact. One reason they came up
with the cul-de-sac was to satisfy the impact on the traffic. She stated the other impact is
the busy road on the other end of the street and that Traer Creek is going to benefit by
changing to commercial zoning to the detriment of all of the residential neighbors. She
does not think that it is inappropriate to have homes backing up to a busy road especially
if they are on a cul-de-sac. She stated that even if the residents did not want the cul-de-
sac that Traer Creek would want it because they are getting one-third acre more to
develop. Ms. Ferraro wants both the cul-de-sac and the residential zoning. She added
that if they do go commercial, put limitations on it.
Mr. Sy Easthouse, resident of Eaglebend Drive, stated that the entire Post Blvd. from I-70
to Highway 6 is going to be commercial, and that is a lot of commercial. He felt that the
residential area is being screwed up by adding commercial zoning. He added that the cul-
de-sac is very important and would like to see residential zoning.
Ms. Colleen Weiss, resident of 5221 Eaglebend Drive, wants a cul-de-sac. She would
like to see residential zoning with a cul-de-sac at the end.
Mr. Walter Dandy, resident of Eaglebend Drive, stated the most important issue is the
cul-de-sac. He also feels that commercial zoning is wrong.
Ms. Jamilya Kovacik, resident of Eaglebend Driver, stated that she wants the cul-de-sac
and residential zoning.
There being no further comments from the public, Mayor Yoder closed the public
hearing.
Mayor Yoder asked for discussion on Ordinance No. 01-14, Series of 2001, amongst the
Council.
Mayor Protein Reynolds motioned approval of Ordinance No. 01-14, Series of 2001 on
second reading. Councilor Peter Buckley seconded the motion.
The Mayor asked for a roll call.
The motion carried unanimously.
Next Mayor Yoder asked for comments from the Council on Ordinance No. 0l -15, Series
of 2001.
Mayor Protein Reynolds confirmed that the agreement sets up lots and a road going
through. Mr. Post stated that it also includes plans for the cul-de-sac and collateralizes
Regular Council Meeting 13
October 23, 2001
the cul-de-sac. He also confirmed that under the documents, Traer Creek is paying for
the cul-de-sac. 0
Mayor Protem Reynolds motioned approval of Ordinance No. 01-15, Series of 2001.
Councilor Debbie Buckley seconded the motion.
The Mayor asked for a roll call.
The motion carried unanimously.
Next, Mayor Yoder asked for comments from the Council on Ordinance No. 0l -08,
Series of 2001.
Councilor McDevitt stated that this is a very difficult one and if they vote to approve this,
he feels that the priority of the majority of residents might be in jeopardy. On the other
hand, if the people are willing to run the risk of not getting the cul-de-sac, then they
ought not approve the ordinance.
Councilor Debbie Buckley stated while a lot of residents are willing to risk it going to the
County, it is in the best interest of the whole neighborhood to have the cul-de-sac. That
will do the most to preserve the neighborhood.
Councilor McDevitt stated that in addition to Lot 3, if Lot 6 goes to the County and gets
commercial zoning, then Traer Creek has a good chance of rezoning the lot commercial
because of the proximity of everything.
Councilor Peter Buckley stated that he would like to continue the working relationship
with Traer Creek. If the land is annexed into Avon then the Town's P&Z have control
over what is built. That control is gone if it goes to the County. He stated regardless of
the way it goes tonight, he will keep working with the people on the issues.
Mayor Protem Reynolds stated that he feels that Mr. Bowen will get his commercial
zoning and that a residential unit next to that with an easement there is a bad situation
overall. He stated that of the 650,000 square feet of commercial, 300,000 will be in two
big boxes, the other 350,000 will be spread out over a large amount of area. Mr.
Reynolds felt that the land should be zoned neighborhood commercial.
Mayor Yoder stated that she feels the most important issue is that it be a part of the town
of Avon.
Mayor Protem Reynolds motioned approval of Ordinance No. 01-08, Series of 2001, on
second reading. Councilor Peter Buckley seconded the motion.
The Mayor asked for a roll call.
The motion carried unanimously.
Regular Council Meeting 14
October 23, 2001
0 Ordinances:
First Reading of Ordinance No. 01-16, Series of 2001, An Ordinance Approving the First
Amendment (the "Amendment") to the Annexation and Development Agreement (the
"Agreement") Between the Town of Avon (the "Town") and Traer Creek LLC, A
Colorado Limited Liability Company, EMD Limited Liability Company, A Colorado
Limited Liability Company (Collectively the "Owner"), and Traer Creek Metropolitan
District, a Quasi-Municipal Corporation and Political Subdivision of the State of
Colorado (the "District") Concerning the Development Rights and Responsibilities of the
Town and the Owner with Respect to the Village at Avon; Authorizing and Instructing
the Mayor of the Town to Sign the Amendment on Behalf of the Town, and Approving a
Site Specific Development Plan Establishing a Vested Property Right Pursuant to Article
68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as Amended
Town Engineer Wood stated this ordinance approves the first amendment to the original
annexation and development agreement. Some of the issues include minor changes in the
way the commercial is developed with the timing in relation to the I-70 interchange. It
makes some housekeeping items as well as provides for a potential use tax that could be
implemented in the future, which was not addressed in the original agreement.
Councilor McDevitt confirmed that June 15 was the new target date for the construction
of the I-70 interchange and the prior date was April 15. He questioned why. Mr. Wood
stated it probably can't be completed by that time for paving purposes.
Councilor Debbie Buckley motioned approval of Ordinance No. 01-16, Series of 2001 on
first reading. Councilor Peter Buckley seconded the motion.
Mayor Yoder asked for a roll call.
The motion carried with Councilor McDevitt voting nay.
Resolutions:
Resolution No. 01-30, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving the Articles of
Incorporation and Bylaws of Buffalo Ridge Affordable Housing Corporation
Asst. Town Manager Brooks stated that by passing this resolution the process is started to
allow the Buffalo Ridge Affordable Housing Association to form and eventually fund the
affordable housing set forth with the Village at Avon.
Councilor Peter Buckley motioned approval of Resolution No. 01-30, Series of 2001.
Councilor Debbie Buckley seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
C
Regular Council Meeting 15
October 23, 2001
Resolutions: 0
Resolution No. 01-31, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving Final Subdivision Plat for
a Resubdivision of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, McGrady Acres, Town of Avon, Eagle County,
Colorado
Town Engineer Wood stated that this is the final plat for resubdivision that was
considered following the public hearing. The final plat is consistent with the preliminary
plat that was previously approved including the cul-de-sac at the end of Eaglebend Drive
subdivision and Lot 1, which is the town park. Staff recommends approval.
Councilor Peter Buckley motioned approval of Resolution No. 01-31, Series of 2001.
Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Town Manager Report:
Town Manger Elting stated that Colorado Association of Ski Towns (CAST) will be in
Minturn on Thursday and Friday. Trends in Ski Resorts is going to be one of the topics.
Consent Agenda:
a.) Approval of the October 9, 2001 Council Meeting Minutes
b.) Approval of the September 25, 2001, Council Meeting Minutes
c.) Financial Matters
d.) Resolution No. 01-32, Series of 2001, A Resolution Approving the Final
Plat, A Resubdivision of Lot 15, Block 3, Wildridge, Town of Avon,
Eagle County, Colorado
e.) Nottingham Road Bike Path - Change Order No. 3
Councilor Debbie Buckley motioned to approve the Consent Agenda. Councilor
McDevitt seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business to come before the Council, Mayor Protein Reynolds
motioned to adjourn the meeting. Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion. The motion
carried unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 820 PM.
Y SUBMITTED:
Nash, Town Clerk
C
Regular Council Meeting 16
October 23, 2001
APPROVED:
Michael Brown
Debbie Buckley
Peter Buckley
Rick Cuny
Mac McDevitt
Buz Reynolds
Judy Yoder
E
11
Regular Council Meeting 17
October 23, 2001
DECISION OF THE TOWN OF AVON COUNCIL IN
THE MATTER OF LOT 41, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE
SUBDIVISION - APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL
REVIEW USE APPROVAL FOR A HOME
OCCUPATION/DAY CARE HOME -- APPEAL FROM
THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
WHEREAS an appeal has been taken from the decision of the Planning and Zoning
Commission approving Shawn Walkowicz`s application for special review use approval for a
home day care as a home occupation at Lot 41 Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision; and
WHEREAS a hearing on such appeal was held before the Avon Town Council on the
23`d day of October, 2001; and
WHEREAS upon the vote of the Town Council it was decided that the decision of the
Planning and Zoning Commission in this matter should be [confirmed] [modified] [reversed];
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT DECIDED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF AVON this
23rd day of October, 2001, that the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission in the
above matter is:
/confirmed
_ modified
_ reversed
[In cases in which the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission is modified
or reversed, the reasons for such action shall be specifically described in the space that
follows.]
AVON TOWN COUN
X oy?A, PM Tee,,
& 7-' ???,
1A ' 0
C
Geralyn D.
P. 0.
2121A
Avon,
September 24, 2001
To Whom it may Concern;
This letter is our formal appeal to the Town of Avon Town Council regarding the
decision made by the Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Committee to allow a
home day care to operate at 2121 B Long Spur, Lot 41, Block 1, in Avon. This
was the decision made at the September 18, 2001 meeting.
11
E
Thank You,
Rich Carroll
CV, ?o
Geralyn D. Carroll
& Rich Carroll
Box 4328
Long Spur
CO 81620
C`?
90 COLORADO
MOUNTAIN
MEDICAL,P.C.
CARDIOLOGY
Larry Gaul, MD, FACC
Kelly A. Fralick, ACNP-C
FAMILY PRACTICE
Jennifer Behenhausen, MD
Jonathan C. Feeney, MD
Phil Freedman, MD
Jean Hadley, MD
Brad Lyons, MD
Marc R. Peck, MD
Kent A. Petrie, MD
Steve Yarberry, MD
Susan A. Vickerman, DO
Meg Hartley, PA-C
Catherine Kitchen, PA-C
GENERALSURGERY
Michael Bradshaw, MD
Laura Medina, MD
INTERNAL MEDICINE
Jack Eck, MD
Wagner Schorr, MD
Mark Stephens, MD
Teresa Cherry, MD
OBSTETRICS
GYNECOLOGY
INFERTILITY
Edward L. Cohen, MD, FACOG
Lone C. Berta, MD, FACOG
Kelly Isbill, DO
PEDIATRICS
Marita Bledsoe, MD, FAAP
Donald White, MD, FAAP
ADMINISTRATION
Michael R. Rohr, C.A.O.
Susan A. O'Neill C.F.O.
Ellie Wyatt, C.O.O.
October 2, 2001
Town of Avon
ATTN: Town Clerk
PO Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
To Whom It May Concern:
I am in support of Shawn Walkowicz starting a daycare at her
home. I have talked to her about my concerns about children
walking to the bus stop to meet the bus at 8:27 at the corner
and she has assured me that the children's drop off time will be
after 8:30 in the morning and that the drop off times have been
spaced out so that not all parents will be showing up at exactly
the same time. As a pediatrician in this community, I am very
aware of the need for more small, in home daycare and wanted to
let you know that I support this particular daycare.
Sincerely,
Marita Bledsoe, M.D./rjb
IN AVON
P.O. Drawer 3380, Avon, CO 81620 IN VAIL IN COPPER
Tel. (970) 949-3222, Fax (970) 949-4047 181 W. Meadow Drive - Suite 200, Vail, CO 81657-5059 P.O. Box 3W8
IN EDWARDS Tel. (970) 476-5695, FAX (970) 476-8976 (west office) 860 Copper Road, Copper Mountain, CO 80443
P.O. Box 1749, 0320 Beard Creek Road, Edwards, CO 81632-2718 181 W. Meadow Drive - Suite 500, Vail, CO 81657-5059 Tel. (970) 968-2330, FAX (970) 966-6681
Tel. (970) 926-6340 FAX (970) 926-6348 Tel, (970) 476-7600, FAX (970) 476-5676 (east office)
Mark Kizzire - Susan Peterson -
2133 - A Long Spur Lane
P. O. Box 8635
Avon, Colorado 81620
970.949.6621
October 2, 2001
Ms. Ady Yoder, Mayor
Mr. Buz Reynolds, Mayor Protem
Mr. Michael Brown, Councilor
Ms. Debbie Buckley, Councilor
Mr. Rick Cuny; Councilor
Mr. Mac McDevitt, Councilor
TOWN OF AVON
Post Office Box 975
Avon, Colorado 81620
,f V\ ;
Re: Special Review Use Appeal
Lot 41, Block 1, (2121-B Long Spur Lane) Wildridge Subdivision
Day Care
Honorable Mayor and Councilor's,
L
On September 18, 2001 we attended the regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning
Commission because of our interest in the above captioned matter. We reside at 2133-
A Long Spur Lane, immediately adjacent to the Day Care facility which was approved
that evening by a 4 to 1 vote.
We are- pleased that you will be reviewing the appeal to the decision made by your
Planning & Zoning Commission; such appeal was strongly recommended by Mr. Chris
Evans, Chairman. We sincerely hope that you will listen to your neighbors and make
your decision based on public attitudes, as recommended in the Town of Avon
Comprehensive Plan, dated November 5, 1996.
Your Comprehensive Plan was drafted to be "dynamic and flexible enough to respond to
changes in economic conditions, legislative action, development technologies, and
public attitudes". Your adopted vision provides for "social concerns and a safe
environment ... changing community values, and the need for a more family-oriented
environment".
Long Spur Lane is a family-oriented environment, we are proud of it and the addition of a
business that does indeed result in more traffic, as well as potential employees is not
compatible with such a family-oriented environment
11
We are concerned about safety on our Lane, which is a dead-end cul-de-sac. The
additional; albeit minimal, traffic generated by a business operation is not prudent - nor
do we believe it should be encouraged by the Town.
October 2, 2001
Page two
The Town's definition or a "Home Occupation" includes the following provisions:
A. Does not produce noise audible outside the dwelling unit where such activity
is taking place.
B. Does not alter the exterior of the property, or affect the residential character
of the neighborhood.
C. Does not interfere with parking, access or other normal activities on adjacent
properties;-
D. Does not require or allow employees to work on the property.
The Planning & Zoning Commission disregarded public testimony on these provisions,
with statements such as:
"The noise we're talking about here would be like having a factory next-door, not
infants and toddlers"
"Well, if the State license requires a fence around the property, you'll. have to
apply for a fence permit, and we'll see if that can be approved, but we don't like
to approve fences in Wildridge"
"We think there is adequate parking and access"
"Let's change the staff recommendation so that no employees are allowed" (Yes,
the staff recommendation approved part-time employees).
The Town's Comprehensive Plan includes Land Use Policy (A1.8) "Home occupations
that reduce commuting by residents and do not negatively impact other residents, should
be encoura,ged." You have a document signed by 20 other residents of Long Spur Lane
that truly believe that the addition of this business will negatively impact them. The
Planning &. , Zoning Commission had testimony from 'a real estate professional that this
business would negatively impact the financial investment of other residents. There was
testimony regarding liability issues for adjacent property owners that was patently
disregarded by your Commission.
S
We understand that the Planning & Zoning Commission is appointed to interpret and
apply the provisions of the Town's Comprehensive- Plan. We hope that our elected
officials can go beyond the "black and white", listen carefully and make a decision based
upon all the testimony received.
We look forward to seeing you at the public hearing to appeal the Special Use for Home
Occupancy Child Care on October 9, 2001.
Susan .Peterson
C
11
(` ems` 1•. ' `? ? /^ (.
n ? r
OCT-01-2001 04:=)l r-m VUL_ I cn ---
10/01/01 0
Avon Town Council
Attn: Mike Brown, Mac McDevitt, Rick Cuny, Buz Reynolds,
Debbie Buckley
Re: Home occupation/ Special Use - Hbme Day Care
2121 B Long Spur
In direct reference to the most recently approved (and appealed)
home day care at the aforementioned address, 2 on old TRail Rd.,
and 1 in AVon based solely on "criteria" by the Avon Planning
and Zoning Commission. We feel it unjust for the Comission to
approve and mandate this type of businesswhich, by ordinance,does
not allow "any audible noise," address aprking or traffic and
safety issues in a shared driveway, liability issues to neighbors,
exposure to pets, probable negative effects on property values,
etc.
To approve/mandate this type of use only promotes disharmony and
possible civil actions among otherwise good neighbors (refer to
any P & Z Commissioner re: L6ng Spur Special use hearing 9/18/01).
The criteria as they exist may be more appropriate as applied
to a single family residence, but should not even be considered
without written approval of all occupants of any mulitfamily
environment.
We, and many others are in process of amending our party wall
agrements (and are soliciting others to do the same), to disallow
any home occupation.
Please consider appropriate changes to the existing criteria and
application process, and any existing applications or appeals for
this (Home DAy Care) type of use.
Sincerely
Tom & Linda Spooner.
p.o. Box 9203
Avon, CO 81620
949-01 63
303-293-2600
11
Jeanette Edmonson
P.O.Box 541,
Avon, Co 81620
(970) 926-2287
The Town Of Avon
Attn: Town Clerk
P.O. Box 975
Avon, Co 81620
Attn: The Town Clerk
Re: An appeal of a licensed home day care run by Shawn Walkowicz in
Wildridge.
My name is Jeanette Edmonson and I am a Licensed home day care provider in
Edwards I have been licensed for 4 years and in that time I have provided quality
day care for many families not wanting to put their children in large commercial
day care centers. My license allows me to care for 6 children per day. I understand
that this is the same license that has been approved for Shawn. I cannot
understand the neighbors appealing this situation and calling this situation a
devastation to their neighborhood. The traffic in this street would be less impacted
than say a family with four teenagers coming and going. The parents drop their
children off and leave, they are not coming and going all day. Seriously how much
devastation could this be. In light of September 11 th 2001, or have these
neighbors forgot about that, I call that devastation, not a few cars in a street, and
children playing. Michael and Shawn were retired and due to substantial losses
on the stock market have to go back to work, when they planned their babies they
thought they had a secure future, but as we all know life can change on a dime.
Why shouldn't she be allowed to protect her interest and work taking care of
children and at the same time being able to be with her own. She could stay home
and collect unemployment I suppose. At least she is trying to do something.
I suggest the people from this street put their energies somewhere else where it
could be used to help people not tear them down. I think we are reminded of that
on television everyday. In light of what happened on September 11th, I thought it
would be a more united America.
One other thing, I have 26 children on my waiting list.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.
Sincerely,
Jeanette Edmonson.
OCT
L._p f VON
OCT-16-2001 14:49 FROM:BRAUN ASSOCIATES 9709267576
Dominic F. Mauriello
2455 Old Trail Road, Unit B
Avon, CO 81620
(970) 748-0920
October I G. 2001
Mayor and Town Council
Town of Avon
400 Benchmark Road
Avon, CO 81620
Re- Ordnance on dome-Based Day-Care
Dear Mayor and Town Council:
ed that the the nme-based
I am writing to express support for the revs i oo n very are con5idcrincj to
day-care regulations at the Town of Avon. 9
recognized that the regulations needed modification and took steps to correct them.
C
In contrast to the comments reported in the ae o Fail or Din-home day-care. 15, 1 am an
am sure thatcate
for home-based bu5ine55e5 in general a
some day I will make use of such a busine55.
The purpose of the proposed regulation has nothing to do with the concern rai5ed by chi
nci " but
n the
ldren
the statement "some residents didn't ruke nhn v'a bU5°ness out ofia home utii ze3 property
rather 15 has to do with how someone g
owned jointly or by others. That quote from the Vail Daily article sounds more Ike
political rhetoric than common sense.
It seems quite appropriate to seek permission to use jointly owned driveways, parking
areas, and common 5pace5 before a busirness owner deade5 to use that land for
additional parking, drop-off areas, storage, or other business related use.
Thank, again for taking Steps to correct an oversight in the Town's regulations.
cerely
5 ,
omirnc F. MAvon Resident
L
Date: October 22, 2001
To: Avon Town Council
Re: Day Care at 2121 B Long Spur Lane, Wildridge Subdivision
From: Amy Byers-Holm
To Avon Town Council Members,
The purpose of this letter is to state my opposition to the proposed Day Care at 2121 B
Long Spur Lane. My husband and I bought property in a residential neighborhood
expecting this to be just that, a residential neighborhood. Suddenly we are forced to live
with a business operating directly across the street that increases traffic, noise, my
liability, is viewed negatively by insurance companies, and has caused tension in this
neighborhood that can only be alleviated in one way, the discontinuance of this day care.
The Walkowicz's have stated that the purpose of the day care is for personal financial
needs - is this, and should this be a neighborhood issue? Financial situations are personal
and should not be the responsibility of the neighborhood. In fact, property values are at
greater risk of devaluation as a result of such a business in the vicinity. My neighbor's
financial situation inadvertently becomes mine. This is not fair.
I am asking you, the Council Members, to look very closely at this particular proposal.
The neighborhood is unsettled and divided as a result of this proposal; there is undue
tension and hostility towards us, the neighbors, for voicing our concerns. Please listen to
the neighbors and make your decision, not based on the past, but on this particular issue.
Recognize this instance as one of the primary factors in the ordinance change that
occurred earlier this month regarding this issue.
Kindly,
Amy Bye - mm
2110 N Long Spur Lane
11
- - -1 - - - . - . - - ' - '" - - .. w. '" " - - - - - - I - - - . - - - - -
a
Shawn D. Walkowicz
Licensed Home Day Care
2121 B Long Spur Lane
C
-jK
Hours & Days
Monday through Thursday
8:30-S:OOpm
Children
Six total infants and toddlers at any given time. This number includes my children.
Only two under the age of two ever allowed on any given day.
These are rules set forth and enforced by the State of Colorado Human Resources.
By signing this paper I am stating that I have discussed and understand the terms and
conditions of Shawn's home day care located at 2121 B Long Spur lane in Wildridge. In
addition, we have discussed and resolved any potential concerns and issues.
Name Address Phone Number
a of Pd. 46-X2 71
3/0-(3 q5
511??{ C() n Lane.. g?-15 - G c1
oss
???.?,? ?, y 5 5 L,cY,) G 5 PV,? 9 q -Cl 05
Vc?
F?? 71
? u
V\
11? `-R -- 149 --
1
v'
Page -1-
•
C
Shawn D. Walkowicz
Licensed Home Day Care
2121 B Long Spur Lane
Hours & Days
Monday through Thursday
8:30-S:OOpm
P
Children
Six total infants and toddlers at any given time. This number includes my children.
Only two under the age of two ever allowed on any given day.
These are rules set forth and enforced by the State of Colorado Human Resources.
By signing this paper I am stating that I have discussed and understand the terms and
conditions of Shawn's home day care located at 2121 B Long Spur lane in Wildridge. In
addition, we have discussed and resolved any potential concerns and issues.
Name Address Phone Number
lip 0 1 6" 0Z 4q,
o ' C?2
l 3719 Cc? ?c+r ? 9
a• s s E La 9 41- 9 5l'c
' ru 1 S
FV3-7&?
uS
ZZE to - /
c ?? ?-130? Lc?? (u ?J -
f r < ?-L4 q - 1
Mar c.44<zrrI'Son
- (a
A0
-
347-
Page -1-
Shawn D. Walkowlcz
Licensed Home Day Care
2121 B Long Spur Lane
Hours & Days
Monday through Thursday
8:30-S:OOpm
Children
Six total infants and toddlers at any given time. This number includes my children.
Only two under the age of two ever allowed on any given day.
These are rules set forth and enforced by the State of Colorado Human Resources.
E
By signing this paper I am stating that I have discussed and understand the terms and
conditions of Shawn's home day care located at 2121 B Long Spur lane in Wildridge. In
addition,-we have discussed and resolved any potential concerns and issues. -
Name Address Phone Number
tQ da-
Page -1-
11
v
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
Two and Over
1- Joshua Veronica Joshua Emily
2- Emily Dylon Veronica Erika
3- Anthony Austin Dylon
4- Dylon Dominic
5- Dominic Anthony
6-
Above is a list of children that come to my house and on what days. The
highlighted children are my own. When December 27th comes, I will have a
newborn who will be home every day with me. He/She will be counted in
the number of children I can have at my house during day care hours.
Also, Some of my day care children are siblings, so that obviously cuts down
on the number of cars arriving at my house.
Dominic and Anthony are siblings
Austin and Dylon are siblings
The children I've printed in red (including my own) are all from Wildridge.
One from just a few doors down the street.
Just For Your information:
The children arrive at 8:30 and after. This is long after the school bus and
trash collectors have come and gone. Also, The parents never park in the
street! Why on earth would they? I've attached my daily sign in sheets
for your review. You can verify for yourself the drop off and pick up times.
The parents really do stagger their drop of times.
Oct 22 01 05:09p Arrow Insurbnce,nvon,CO 970-949-6306
rrow insurance rnanage?nert
"The Insurance People"
October 22, 2001
To Whom It May Concern,
We have been asked by our insureds, Michael and Shawn Walkowicz, to
explain personal liability coverage on a standard homeowner's policy.
It is our understanding that Mrs. Walkowicz is opening a daycare center in
her home, for which she has purchased general liability coverage aside from
A 0. Box 5000
Frisco her homeowners policy. Her concern is that several neighbors have
Colorado 80443 protested this, saying they will not be able to purchase homeowner's
(970) 668-.3500
fx6m-3941 insurance on their own homes.
This is absolutely not true. No where on a standard homeowner's oapplication
other
P.O. Box 860
does it ask if your neighbor has a daycare center, or any
Brrektreridge
Colorado 80424 This has no bearing on anyone's insurance other than the person providing
(970) 453 X96 the daycare in her home.
fax 4.s.?-7e91
I have attached a standard application, please note the qualifying questions
P.Q. Box.918 on the second page. I have worked in this industry for almost 20 years and
Avon
Co.a,, 816'20 never has this been questioned.
(970) 949-5110
f m 949.6306'
Please feel free to call me if you have any questions.
/fInsurance Team,
'
0? F th/?lArrow
IUa
Dori Marrero
F3?
p.1-
Oct 22 01 05:09p Rrrow Insurence,Rvon,CO 970-949-6306 p.2
ACORD HOMEOWNER APPLICATION DATE(MMIDDIYYYY)
PRODUCER PHONE APPLICANT'S NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include county & ZIP-4)
FAX NAIC CODE FACILITY CODE
NM.
I
POLICY M
DATE AT COJPLAN HOME PHONES DAY
CURR RES
EVE
aUSCODE EFFECTIVE DATE EXPIRATION DATE BUSINESS PHONE i DAY
CODE:
AGENCY CUSTOMER ID
APPLICANT INFORMATION
PREVIOUS ADDRESS (H toes than ] yests) YRS AT LOCATION OF PROPERTY IF DIFF FROM ABOVE (Inc county & ZIP)
PREV
ADDR
APPLICANTS OCCUPATION APPLICANT S EMPLOYER NAME AND ADDRESS YsARS iR YEMs W( YcARs w( MAR DATE OF BIRTH 90CU1L SECURITY N
(Stato nature of busine"Ills elirmpleysd) cURR Oce RRESWLrRIO R EM BTAT
CO-APPLICANT'S EMPLOYER NAME AND ADDRE38 YEA ? i I Y" Its va 8TA I DATE OF BIRTH ` I SOCIAL SECURITY S
ptoyod) r trmp m
DED (Tvoo & Amount)
COVERA
HO FORM OEWLIM115 car I-Ij-
DWELLING Iu t T
OTHER
STRUCTURES
PERSONAL
PROPERTY
LOSS OF USE
PERSONAL
EACH OCCURRENCE
MEDIC 8
EACH PERSON
ALL PERIL
WINDIHAIL
' THEFT
NAMED
a : WfZICANIF
N ot App cabl e in
ENDORSEMENTS
REPLACEMENT COST DWELLING REPLACEMENT COST CONTENTS
ENTER OTHER ENDORSEMENT(S)
PAYMENT PLAN ACORD 610 Attached (NOT APPLICABLE IN NCJ
ACCOUNTS:
BILLING IF DIRECT BILL: IF APPLICANT BILL:
DIRECT BILL BILL APPLICANT F70THER: FULL PAY
OTHER:
AGENCYSILL I MORTOA
GNNDERWRITING
REMIUM
EST TOTAL PREMRJM
MAIL POLICY TO:
AGENT
APPLICANT
RATIO
PLASTIC YR BUILT / ROOMS MARKET VALUE STRUCTURE TYPE USAGE TYPE FARM 111FAM. 10 PURCHASE
SEHL DATE/PRICE
FRAME SIDING
A$516TO3 $ DWELLING F TOWNHOUSE PRIMARY COC RES
MASONRY SIDING
MASONRY $G FT RAPTS REPLACEMENT COST APART ROWHOUSE SECONDARY UNOCC
VENEER FIRE RES
ALUMINUM
:
CONDO
CO-OP
SEASONAL
VACANT
RENOVATION TYPE
PART
r i
NUMBER OF TERR PREM PROTECT DISTANCE TO PROTECTION DEVICE TY PE HEAT TYPE NONE WIRING
FIRE llNtT3IN CODE GROUP CLASS
HYDRANT FIRE
SYSTEM
SMOKE
TEMP
URGL
PRIMARY:
P B
FT MI CEN SECONDARY: HEATING
FIRE DISTRICTICOOE NUMBER IRECT OIL STORAGE TANK LOCATION ROOFING
FIREIEC RATE D
LOCAL EXTERIOR ?At
SWIMMNNti ST ORM SHUTTERS
LOCATION
DWELLING OCCUPIED BY OEADSOLT VISIBLE TO NEIGHBORS YES NO
WITHIN WITHIN PRO
I[ OWNER FIRE FxnN GmAI4XR HOUSEKEEPING CONDITION FENCED GROUND YE3 R A R Yi
SUBURB
CITY L303 DIVING
IN GROUND
NO
B GLASS
N
SLOG WITHRN
CODE INSPECTED9 TAX CODE I TENANT
RATING OCCUPIED DAlLY9 RNVTED WINO CLASS
H SEMI'
RESi8TiVE ROOF TYPE FOU NDATION CLOSI
GRADE
I
OPEN
NONE_
Oct 22 01 05:10P Arrow Insurence,Rvon,CO 970-949-6306 P•3
GENERAL INFORMATION YES No
EXPLAN ALL "YES" RESPONSES IN REMARKS (YE8 NO EXPLAIN ALL "YES" RESPONSES IN REMARKS .(Exc•pt question 15,18 and 171
14. DURING THE LAST FIVE YEARS (TEN YEARS N RHODE ISLAND),
1, ANY FARMING OR OTHER BUSINESS CONDUCTED ON PREMISES (Includiq d?ykhiM ears) HAS ANY APPLICANT BEEN CONVICTED OF ANY DEGREE OF THE
CRIME OF ARSON? (In RI, failure to disclose the existence of an arson
1. ANY RESIOENCF EMPLOYEES? (Number and typo of full and pen time •mployae) conviction Is a misdemeanor punishable by a sentence of up to one
vear of Imarisonment) T-
3. ANY F
4. ANY 1
PIED
1S. IS THERE A MANAGER ON THE
6 ANY OTHER INSURANCE WITH THIS COMPANY? tact poncy numw
6. HAS INSURANCE BEEN TRANSFERRED WITHIN AGENCY?
7. ANY COVERAGE DECLINED, CANCELLED OR NO WED
DURING THE LAST 3 YEARS? NOT APPLICABLE IN MO
T HAS APPLICANT HAD A FORECLOSURE, REPOSSESSION OR
BANKRUPTCY DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS?
9. ARE THERE ANY ANIMALS OR EXOTIC PETS KEPT ON PREMISES?
Note breed and bile hleto
10. IS PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN TWO MILES OF TIDAL WATI
11. IS PROPERTY SITUATED ON MORE THAN FIVE ACRES? (lf yes, 4eserlba Ion
12. DOES APPLICANT OWN ANY RECREATIONAL VEHICLES
(SNOW MOBILES, DUNE SUGGYS, MINI BIKES, ATV8, ETC)?
13. 15 BUILDING RETROFITTED FOR EARTHQUAKE (If applicable)
HISTORY "t"NF_?nsT a YFIABS.At '"' "" "' ""'
DATE TYPE I DESCRIPTION OF LOSS
PRIOR COVER
PRIOR CARRIER
DITIONAL INTERES
p MOIITO'E NAME
ADDL NT
INTO MORTG'C NAME AND ADDRESS
ADOL WT
REMARKS
RENTERS AND 16. IS THERE A SECURITY ATTENE
CONDOS ONLY:
17. IS THE BUILDING ENTRANCE L
1e. ANY UNCORRECTED FIRE OR BUILDING CODE VIOL.ATIONO
19. IS BUILDING UNDERGOING RENOVATION OR RECONSTRUCTION?
(Give estimated completion date and dollar value)
20. IS HOUSE FOR SALE?
21. IS PROPERTY WAN 300 FT OF A COMMERCIAL OR
NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY?
21. IS THERE A TRAMPOLINE ON THE PREMISES?
23. WAS THE STRUCTURE ORIGINALLY BUILT FOR OTHER THAN A
PRIVATE RESIDENCE AND THEN CONVERTED?
25. IF A FUEL OIL THE TANK? (Give First Party OTHER and limit, and Third Party and
AMOUNT
PRIOR POLICY NUMBER
EXPIRATION DATE RISK NEW TO AGENCY
WAM nvaoonn
LOAN NUMBER
ATTACHM
3TATE S
FOR COMPANY USE ONLY --
BINDERlSIGNATURE
INSURANCE BINDER IF THE "BINDER" BOX TO THE LEFT IS COMPLETED, THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY'
S 9UBJE
EFFECTIVE DATE EXPIRATION DATE TITHE TERMS, CONDITIONS ANW IMITAISURANCE STIPULATED TIONS OF THE POLICY(IES) NI CURRENT USE BYITHE COMPANY.
THIS BINDER MAYBE CANCELLED BY THE INSURED BY SURRENDER OF THIS BINDER OR BY WRITTEN NOTICE TOT
COMPANY STATING WHEN CANCELLATION WILL BE EFFECTIVE. THIS BINDER MAY BE CANCELLED BY THE COMPA
TIME 12,01 AM BY NOTICE TO THE INSURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY CONDITIONS. THIS BINDER IS CANCELLED WH
NO REPLACED BY A POLICY. IF THIS BINDER IS NOT REPLACED BY A POLICY THE COMPANY IS ENTITLED TO CHARD
PREMIUM FOR THE BINDER ACCORDING TO THE RULES AND RAT aS IN USE ? F THEOMPANYCOMPA. NY. THE QUOTED PREMIUf
Notice of Insurance Information Practices
PERSONAL INFORMATION ABOUT YOU, INCLUDING INFORMATION FROM A CREDIT REPORT, MAY BE COLLECTED FROM PERSONS OTHER THAN YOU IN CONNECT
WITH THIS APPLICATION AND SUBSEQUENT RENEWALS. SUCH INFORMATION AS WELL AS OTHER PERSONAL AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION COLLECTED BY US OR I
AGENTS MAY IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES BE DISCLOSED TO THIRD PARTIES. YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REVIEW YOUR PERSONAL INFORMATION OUR FILES AND I
REQUEST CORRECTION OF ANY INACCURACIES. AMORE DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF YOUR RIGHTS AND OUR PRACTICES REGARDING SUCH INFORMATION IS AVAILA
UPON REQUEST. CONTACT YOUR AGENT OR BROKER FOR INSTRUCTION ON HOW TO SUBMIT A REQUEST TO US.
Copy of the notice of information practices (privacy) has been given to the applicant. (Not applicable In all states
Any person who knowingly and with Intent to defraud any insurance company or another person tiles an application for insurance or statem
of claim containing any materially false Information, or conceals for the purpose of misleading information concerning any fact mate olien
donied)bstantialJ civil penalties. (Not ap,
bit nd [NY: commits a fraudulent
OR, or Insurance
VT; In DCC LA, MEi and VA, insurance benefit: criminal
CO, HI, NE, O,
Applicant's Statenlent:l have read the above application and any attachments. i declare that the Information provided In them Is true, cemi
and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. This Information Is being offered to the company as an Inducer
fn issue the oolicV for which I am applying. _
To whom it may concern,
In regards to shawn walkowicz' council meeting last month on opening a licensed
home daycare in a residential wildridge neighbourhood,I have to say the following:
-I have been a licensed daycare provider since june 1998 on 449 Moonridge Drive
in Edwards.Not once have I had a complaint from any of my neighbours.As a provider
you can take care of up to 6 children,including your own.that means shawn can take care
of 3 more children besides her own.
-I get at least 2 calls per week from frantic parents trying to find a quality daycare.
As you all may know,children or no children, we all have to go back to work,in order to
afford this beautifull place on earth.
-Shawn chose to stay home with her children and run a daycare part time.I think
that is a wise decision.Let her enjoy these few precious years with her little ones,before
they enter kindergarten.
-Where will the 800some babies go who will be born in 2001?Let us be more
tolerant of eachother,help out our community-we desperately need quality home
daycares!
I invite you to come by my home at any time,and tell me if this home daycare is a
nuisance to you,or more so talk to my neighbours.
Sincerely
Gerlinde Debie-Millette
C7
Rumpelsrilrskin School
P.O. Box 5760-Avon-Colorado-81620
970-949-4590
September 23, 2001
Avon Town Council
Avon, -C-atc ado 81-62.0
Dear Council Members:
I am the owner of Rumpelstiltskin School and have provided
-a preschoof for c-hif-dr-en for 23 yEa-rs. f3-urirng that time f fh-ave
primarily offered programs for children three to six years old.
Because of the state regulations, it is extremely difficult and
-expensive to prvv tl-e ca-re for infants -anti tod-dilers. Thet'e is a
severe shortage of care for this age level.
One -of the Best -solutions to this probiern is O' eased fro-me
day care for infants and toddlers. This care is supervised by the
county and provides standards for the home care provider to
follow.
I strongly recommend that the council approve the licensing
of Mrs. W-aFkow-i-cz s-o tfrat s" tariff be -a-bfe to provide tare for
infants and toddlers. It will be an advantage for the working
families of Avon.
I am also a 'vildridge resident and I have no objection to
individuals doing licensed day care in their homes.
Sincrely,
i?at h*'le e n Kunis
Director
C7
The Town of Avon
Attn: Town Clerk
P.O. Box 975
Avon, Co 81620
Dear Town Clerk,
My husband and I recently moved here from Ohio in order for my husband to complete
his Orthopeadic Fellowship with the Steadman Hawkins Clinic in Vail. We live in
Wildridge and we were very pleased to find Shawn Walkowicz's home daycare. We
have been here two months and have been looking for childcare ever since. I was placed
on numerous waiting lists at the ABC School, the Learning Tree, The Learning Center,
and on various home daycare lists. Until Shawn's daycare, we were unable to find
childcare for our two boys. The lack childcare also caused me to be unable to pursue
work.
I believe there is a HUGE need for daycare facilities in the valley, especially Avon. I feel
that a home daycare in Wildridge is a wonderful and much needed idea. Not only did my
husband and I find quality childcare, we found it in our own community. In the winter
we will not have to travel very far to put our children in daycare and we will be
comforted by the quality care they will be receiving. If you were to close Mums the
Word Day Care we would have to try to find childcare again.
As a resident of Wildridge, I do not understand how a home daycare would devastate the
neighborhood. There are so many children in the neighborhood that additional children
would blend right in. For people to complain about this daycare tells me that they do not
have children, nor do they have and idea of how needed childcare facilities are in Avon.
Please do not close Mums the Word because of a few ignorant people.
Thank you,
Kristen Joseph , et4-?? 9?a??
5164 Longsun Lane
Avon, Co 81620
845-2299
E
10/08/2001 14:13 9707041723 HKALESOLRCECENTER PACE e2
The Resource Center
The Childcare Resource & Referral of Engle and. Garfield Counties
206 &)utb 3rd street
CarbRmdale, CO
1-877-%.34779 A CORRA
resource @sopris.net PARTN E R
f"-970-704-1723
To The Town of Avon,
As the child care resource and referral specialist for Eagle County, Z
am writing this letter in support of family child care homes in the Town iof
Aeon. The lack of child care for infants and toddlers in the Avon area is at a
crisis level.
After updating vacancies in my database, I have found that there are 0
infant vacancies (slots for children aged 2 and twJer) in Eagle Cotuaty and
the Vail Valley. These Figures include 19 licensed homes and 21 licensed
centers/preschools. Only 6 centers in Eagle County accept children under
age 2, and most of these centers/preschools enroll children who are aged 1
year and older. The Eagle Valley does riot have any centers that are
specifically for children from birth to age 3.
Currently the only licensed child care for infants and toddlers in the
Town of Avon is through licensed family homes, one of which is under the
threat of being closed down.
Child care has traditionally been looked at as a business. However,
family child care is a service to any resort community where the cost of
living requires both parents to work. Therefore, I would encourage the
T+nwn of Avon to support licensed child care.
Sinc re , C f
Karla Stukey
Child Care Resource and Referral Specialist for Garfield and Eagle Counties
t
10/23/01 TLIE 15:05 FAX 970 926 6503
Prudential
To Whom It May Concern
PRU EDWARDS
Prudential Gore Range Properties, Inc.
Inn at Riverwalk
P.O. Box 1103, Edwards, CO 81632
Bus 970 926-8440 Fax 970 926-6503
Tol I Free 800 637-4052
In my professional opinion I do not think a day care facility located at 2121B Longspur
Lane will effect property values in the immediate neighborhood. If anything it may
enhance an already great family neighborhood. In my experience I have not heard or
seen of any devalution in property values occurring because of such a situation.
Bill Carty
Ia 0
October 23, 2001
To The Town of Avon:
I came this evening to support Shawn Walkowicz's licensed in-home daycare.in
Wildridge. One reason is that I used a home daycare for my 2 children, and I was
extremely happy with having that as an option and also with the care my children were
given. Secondly, I am a neighbor and I truly do not believe the daycare will have a
negative impact on the neighborhood. I have not noticed any extra noise or traffic as a
result of the daycare being open this past month. I agree that the daycare children should
not play on the driveway but instead play in a fenced in yard. Also, I believe business
insurance is important even though it is not required by the state. These were my original
concerns and they have all been addressed.
There are 600 babies being born at VVMC per year and at this point there are only 7
licensed home daycare centers between Vail and Edwards. I was stunned to learn this. I
believe in-home daycare centers are a very important part of the community. It gives
parents another alternative for their children to be cared for in a small, controlled
environment. One of the reasons I chose an in-home daycare over a commercial daycare
is that the children at the commercial daycare centers were constantly sick and passing
the illnesses around. I had a better feeling with a smaller group of children. As we all
know, there are very few daycare centers that take children under 2 years of age. We
need more options for daycare that are licensed and legal because parents will come up
with other means perhaps such as hiring illegal immigrants as nannies.
It would be a disservice to this community to close down licensed daycare centers. There
is a strong need for childcare in the valley, what message is being sent to others who may
be considering opening a licensed in-home daycare? The benefit of providing our
community with a necessity such as in-home daycare seems to be the exact opposite of
the proposed legislation requiring neighbors' approval. In-home daycare, in the spirit of
being a good neighbor, should be regulated simply by an agreement between the
neighbors not decided in a courtroom. We must also consider the potential affect this
type of law would have on other home businesses.
Since ly,
G
Anne Him
September 18, 2001
Planning and Zoning Commission
City of Avon
Dear Sir or Madam:
w
I EP 2001
00rnmunity Devef, went
Please register my opposition to the creation of a day care facility at 2121B Long Spur in Wildridge. We
moved here, rather than to other mixed-use areas of the valley, in order to live in a residential area sans the
chance of having a commercial activity as a neighbor.
We believe after questioning friends who are employed as realtors that the change in zoning and the
establishment of a child care facility backing on our yard, would decrease the value of our property in an
already faltering market, and make our home more difficult to sell. as well as increasing noise and traffic while
we are living here.
Please consider the concerns of the adjacent property owners when evaluating this matter.
Sincerely,
Carole Ann McNeill
2350B Saddleridge Loop
El
Recording Secretary
Town of Avon
PO Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
RB: Zoning change 2121B Long Spur
??AI j
G'o
% 10>
40,
We are opposed to the zoning change applied for by the applicants Shawn and Michael Walkowicz for
several reasons. First of all this is a residential neighborhood not a business area We didn't purchase a
home here to live next door to a day care center.
Secondly this is a crowded neighborhood consisting of duplex homes, each duplex having 2 cars each
There is already a lot of traffic on this street with most drivers driving too fast. It would be dangerous to
have even more children running around the yard and maybe into the street. The change would greatly
increase tra>3•ic with drop offs and pick ups at busy times of the day for residents going and coming from
work There is also no where to park.
Thirdly this kind of business would increase the noise level of the area with lots more children being
outside yelling and screaming
Thank you for taking our comments into consideration.
Sincerely.
cC
ancy and Peter Sherowski
u
E
E
. 09-IU-at 15:254, EXPONETS IDm9-707488866 P0110:
11
Geralyn D. & Rich Carroll
P.O. Box 4328
2121A Long Spur
RECEIVED
SEP 1 8 2001
Community Developmer
Avon, CO 81620
September 18, 2001
To Whdm it may Concern;
This letter is to address the application for rezoning of 2121 B Long Spur for a
Commercial business; specifically a Home Day Care Business.
I am opposed to the rezoning of 2121 B Long Spur for a commercial business for
a number of reasons. We will be at the meeting to discuss this proposed
rezoning. This letter is our formal letter of opposition to the rezoning.
The first reason is that this area is zoned residential. Rezoning for a commercial
business of this type will drastically affect the quality of life we experience. This
is not a low impact one-person business. This is a business that will have six
cars coming in the morning to drop off their children. Six cars will arrive in the
evening to pick-up the children. There will be an employee operating the
business when the homeowners are in Hawaii for three weeks in October.
This increase in traffic is dramatic. 2121 Long Spur has a narrow one-car
driveway. Further, 2121 B Long Spur has limited parking. The increase in traffic
will make it more difficult for us o go about our daily life. It will be a danger for
our children. It will hamper the plowing of the driveway in the winter. All of this
adds up to a very difficult and hazardous situation.
The school bus stops just a few yards away at the intersection of Long Spur and
Saddleridge Loop each morning about 8:00 a.m. Again, increased traffic will be
a problem for everyone, both the children walking to the bus and the children
being dropped off at the Home Day Care.
My wife as well as others in the immediate area work night shifts at the hospital.
We will now have increased noise from 6 children during the day. This will affect
her sleep and enjoy our home as we can today.
09-1o-.rte 15:26 EXPQNETS ID-9787488866 P62/02
Liability is another huge issue. 2121 Long Spur has a shared backyard with no
fence. Suan made the comment today that "if you want a fence then buy one."
Try as hard as one might it will be next to impossible to keep the children
relegated to just the 2121 B side of the yard and driveway.
Commercial businesses of this nature do negatively affect the lives of the
neighbors around the business. Let's keep commercial businesses in areas that
are specifically designed and zoned for commercial businesses. The need for
Day Care is better addressed by incentives to open a business in a commercial
business area.
Thank You,
7ZO?'?
Rich Carroll
eralyn D. Carroll
C
0
To: Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission RECEIVED
From: Amy Holm SEP.1 8 ?poi
2110 N Long Spur, Wildridge Subdivision, Avon Community Development
Regarding: September 18, 2001 Public Hearing on proposed home day care at 2121 B
Long Spur, Wildridge Subdivision, Avon, Colorado
To whom it may concern:
I am writing to bring to your attention my extreme opposition for the proposed, above-
mentioned Special Use consideration.
Issues:
*Safety and well being of my family. I strongly believe that the safety of my
family is being infringed on due to the following: 12 additional cars (six children
= six cars two times per day during business days) on my street. Added noise due
to the additional children (I do not believe in corralling children in a confined area
for up to 9112 hours because of a negligent decision regarding this issue). This is
a dead end street. There is very little traffic and concern about access into or out
of my home. I am not willing to give up this convenience as a result of this issue
for those who may block my path or park in the street (which, of course the Town
® of Avon will be monitoring and ticketing those who disregard the parking
ordinances, correct?). How will snow removal proceed with the additional cars in
the street? Will the Town of Avon request these workers return to our street to
finish a job they were unable to do if there are cars blocking their path? And trash
removal, how will the Town of Avon address missed trash pick up due to cars
parked inappropriately?
*Dog currently residing at 2121 B Long Spur. This neighborhood is quiet and
friendly and a dog outside during day care hours in inclimate weather, or
otherwise, with little attention is bound to continue crying/ barking throughout the
day. It would be out of my love of animals that I would be inclined to inform
Animal Control if appropriate measures are not taken to ensure the dog's well
being. And how do you feel about a day care and dog mixed under the same roof.
*Devaluation of property values upon granting of said Special Use. According to
the Town of Avon this is a residential area We are a young couple who invested
in this residential area because of the value of living in a restricted use area. Our
elected Avon officials should stand behind those who entrusted our investments
and futures in your hands, not threaten to disregard our faith in you to protect us
against matters in which you have control.
*The proposed day care allows for six children to be in the day care facility. Does
this include, or is this in addition, to the two, soon to be three, children already
residing at 2121 B Long Spur. Upon the illness of the two, soon to be three,
children are nine children then acceptable in the dwelling?
*If a Special Use is granted what happens upon the sale of the home? Does the
Special Use transfer? Is it limited? And what if the current residents decide to
change the business into something other than day care? What guidelines or
restrictions describe what the Use is? Upon granting a Special Use, what other
businesses can operate at above address? Who will enforce changes in business
plan? How can the Town of Avon reasonably make a decision on the next
business at this residence, or any other business proposal in the Wildridge
subdivision, indiscriminately once you have decided to allow one type of
business?
*Finally, at what point is the Town of Avon able to deny Special Use applicants
in the Wildridge subdivision? How do you plan to do so indiscriminately? Have
you given consideration to the density of Special Use approvals? What would
happen if suddenly 40 applicants come to you wanting Special Uses for day care?
At what point do you honor the fact that this is a residential community? And at
what point do you, all the Town of Avon officials in charge of making this
decision, enforce the guidelines that made this a desirable housing community?
This issue, in my mind, goes far beyond this one day care Special Use consideration. Day
care is a countywide, statewide, and nationwide problem. It is unfair for you to ask the
neighbors of this proposed day care to begin fighting the problem. Many have chosen not
to have children themselves so how can you ask them to take this issue on in their own
back yards? Please understand that, if approved, the can of worms is open in this
community and acting indiscriminately from here on out may prove to be impossible for
the Town of Avon.
E
SEP-17-2001 01:37 PM VOLTEK IMPORT SERVICE 303 293 2454 P.01
E
E
11
9/17/01
Town of Avon
Planning & Zoning Commission
Community Development Dept.,
Recoeding Secretary
P.O. Box 975
Avon, CO 81620
To Whom It May Concern:
juewdolenea /q?unwwoo
1001 L T d3S
03AI333H
ph.970-748-4413 fax.970-949-5749
Ref: Proposed Home Day Care, 2121 B Long Spur, Wildridge
Subdivision
Considerations:
1. Ref. Zoning code 17.08.360 A. -"Cannot produce audible
noise outside the dwelling." How does a day care
provider control the noise level of potentially 6 (six)
1j - 3 year old children (including those in residence)
short of containg them indoors with windows and doors
closed?
2. Increased traffic on a street with only one ingress/egress.
3. Safety of children due to proximity of street and no
fences, pets, etc.
4. Potential negative effect on resale property values
(Fudiciary responsibility of realtors to disclose if
questioned)
5. How many home day care or other home occupations may
be approved in a given area, block, filing, etc.?
6. Need for additional personal or business insurance due
to children's exposure to traffic, pets, etc.
7. Conflict wtih party wall agreement?
8. If approved, this could set a precedent allowing other
home occupations that, if disapproved, could raise a
question of discrimination.
9. Disapproval at this level would avoid possible civil
actions with otherwise good neighbors.
With all' the above considered, we do not suppot approval
of this request for Special Use zoning.
R pect ly,
Thomas W. I Linda Spooner
21108 Long Spur
Avon, CO 81620
970-949-0163
We the undersigned are OPPOSED to the rezoning of 2121B Long Spur, Lot 41, Block 1,
Wildridge subdivision, Avon, Colorado for the proposed Home Day Care for children
Name
ignature
Mme
Signature
111n
Name
L ",;)
Signature
l
Name
Signature
GQr?
Name
Date
Address
.1 d-- n
Date
fo ?41)
Address
/ 16-)
Date
Address
Date 1
Address
? 0i
Date
L
Address
11
We the undersigned are
Wildridge subdivision,
ages 1 '/z to 3 years old.
OPPOSED to the rezoning of 2121B Long Spur, Lot 41, Block 1,
Avon, Colorado for the proposed Home Day Care for children
1
Signature
Dame
Signat&e
!?7 r4r?1? 7J. 7? I?ZZ1 Y-?
Name
QvL?
?IJI'/,
Signature
D ? Cv
Name
1-elx
Signature
Name
S' to e
r//-2?7 . a tv-
Name
Date
-3, S
Address
,l 1-1 0
Date
13 3 `a t,? S,P,4 ?,rr-r??
Address
g'- / -7
Date
4?& Lino
247
Address
,f
DaW
Address
Date
Address
E
We the undersigned are OPPOSED to the rezoning of 2121B Long Spur, Lot 41, Block 1,
Wildridge subdivision, Avon, Colorado for the proposed Home Day Care for children
ages 1 '/z to 3 years old.
D/
Signature Date'
Name
Signature
tiAryl
Name
Signature
Name
4?N'?ce s
W nature
/?
c c,S. ?JV ?Ge T
Name
Signature
Name
-u.Zt 09 4a?,
Address
Date
17/QC-/oi
Address
gj1
Date
Z4--W z-'' ?_
Address
C.
E
QOf
Date
Address
Date
Address
11
We the undersigned are OPPOSED to the rezoning of 2121B Long Spur, Lot 41, Block 1,
Wildridge subdivision, Avon, Colorado for the proposed Home Day Care for children
ages 1 '/s to 3 years old.
Signature
Nam
a
R
Date
a(J O >z?
Address
Date/
r`-1
LJ
E
Name
Signature
2/0
Name
a re
Ndme
Signature
Name
Address
Y
Date
a /,- d 2,,wig P4,;r- Ll . ti-
Address
Date
Address
Date
Address
0
a
CHILD'S DAILY LOG-IN SHEET
DAY:r1_(?j_Da---- -? --- MONTH: YEAR: ------
CHILD'S NAME SIGN-IN
TIME ADULT
SIGNATURE SIGN-OUT
TIME ADULT
SIGNATURE COMMENTS
Emily
b
} - o?
Erikah , ???
CHILD'S DAILY LOG-IN SHEET
DAY: MONTH: 0? C _ E V? -YEAR: CHILD'S NAME SIGN-IN ADULT SIGN-OUT ADULT COMMENTS
TIME SIGNATURE TIME SIGNATURE
Dylon S.
Emily L.
1 7
? 1.C55'n c
S5
i
Norman Wood
From: Carol Krueger [ckrueger@weartrav.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 5:06 PM
To: jyoder@avon.org; mbrown@avon.org; mmcdevitt@avon.org; pbuckley@avon.org;
debbie@internetvail.com; befting@avon.org; nwood@avon.org; blevin@avon.org;
(brooks@avon.org
Subject: McGrady Acres Matters
CAROL and JOHN KRUEGER
5200 Eaglebend Drive
BEN and CELINE KRUEGER
5198 Eaglebend Drive
Avon, Colorado 81620
(970) 476-7646 (w)
(970) 949-1198 (h)
October 17, 2001
Dear Town Council and Other Representatives:
Unfortunately, I will be out of town for the McGrady Acres meeting on
October 23, 2001, and I speak for the owners of the residences listed above.
Since I will be gone, I feel compelled to write to urge you to represent our
neighborhood during the decisions which will be made at that meeting. Three
issues will be addressed at that meeting: (1) Final Plat reflecting road
realignment, new developer lots and cul de sac; (2) re-zoning to
neighborhood commercial, and (3) Annexation, Development and Subdivision
Improvement Agreement. The following are my thoughts on each of these 3
issues:
1. Final Plat.
The neighborhood did not get to see this document much in advance of the
public hearing even though the Town told the developers and the neighbors to
get together to work on it and even though Bill Post told me before the
meeting that the planner was working on a residential layout (in addition to
a commercial layout). There were no such meetings, and we have never seen a
plan for residential subdivision. The Town Council gave preliminary
approval to the plat even though it reduced the size of the park from the
prior submission where Eaglebend Drive continued through to the new Post
Boulevard. When the cul de sac was added, the developer decided to take the
additional acreage (more than 1/3 acres) for himself which would otherwise
have been used for Eaglebend Drive (confirmed by 4.1(c) of the A,D,SIA).
Land that we thought might be used as a buffer between the cul de sac and
the new developer lots got taken. Residential lots of that size have sold
for between $200,000-300,000. I doubt that construction of the cul de sac
will cost that much. Why does the developer get this windfall?
Do we like the plan? With no park buffer between the cul de sac and the new
lots, there is very little room to put a berm, landscaping or other
screening. Norm says there may be about 10 feet. He says that, although he
interprets the code to require a 25 foot setback of the developer buildings
from the cul de sac, the developer will most likely request a variance to
the usual rear setback, which is 10 feet. We are against such a variance.
Our requests for protection from the proposed commercial uses are not new.
Our neighborhood petition specifically requests these items. Bill Post says
he does not want to put up the Berlin wall. But we could be looking
straight down our street to the rear of a strip mall with loading docks,
parking lot lights and dumpsters. We could be listening to "Welcome to
McDonald's, may I help you?" 24 hours a day. Why wouldn't we want as much
buffer as possible and some type of visual and other screening?
2. Re-Zoning.
Obviously, the plat issue goes hand in hand with the zoning. We want the
developer lots to remain residential and join our street at the end of our
cul de sac. Then the buffer and screening issues go away. Our petition
made this clear from the start. No new requests. I will even be happy to
give the developer the extra Eaglebend Drive acreage to build on if he would
join our neighborhood (some neighbors may disagree and still push for a
larger park).
I have always felt at least as strongly if not more strong about the zoning
than about the cul de sac. Of course, I live 2 doors down from what could
be a 24 hour car wash or restaurant. Not all neighbors on our street will
be as impacted. Their property values will not go down like mine will. Why
should I bear the consequences of the developer bringing a busy street next
to his own property? He only bought that property to have room to build
Post Boulevard. If you think this property is key to his development, I
think you are mistaken. Here is my quick list on the zoning matter:
A. By keeping the zoning residential, you maintain the values and
expectations of not only the existing owners, but the developer who
purchased subject to that zoning.
B. Any owner purchasing residential property along the busy street will
know in advance what they are getting. With commercial zoning, we are
forced to live next to commercial uses never anticipated to be there.
C. You should not make your decision based on the statement of the Lot 6
owner that he may go for commercial zoning. He does not have that zoning
and we will fight that even harder. There will be no park to buffer us from
that commercial, and the impact on us will be doubled once commercial is on
all tracts adjacent to us. From my perspective, the owner of Lot 6 has a
bigger beef with his situation than Traer Creek because the busy road was
imposed on him. However, if the value of his property is affected by that
road, the owner of Lot 6 can and will be compensated (I promise you) for
those damages.
D. I am not impressed by the developer's statement that he does not have a
good plan for residential due to the requirement that he must give the Lot 6
owner an access easement. The developer's installation of the new road and
its new grade causes the access for Lot 6 to be in this new location. His
own property needs to bear that impact. Since he is getting the extra
Eaglebend Drive acreage, he actually comes out better than if Eaglebend
Drive went through. Even if his layout for residential is not ideal, it is
a sacrifice that he will willingly make in the end for the bigger project.
E. I also do not believe the developer when he says that he will not build
the cul de sac if he is forced to keep his property residential. Play that
hand and request the cul de sac and residential zoning. He will not fight
you because he has bigger and better things to do. This is a standard
requirement for developers to pay for the impacts of their new development.
In addition, if his property is residential, the cul de sac benefits that
property. Note at your last meeting, Bill avoided answering your question
whether he would keep the property residential if we scrap the cul de sac.
He will keep the cul de sac, no matter what the zoning. Perhaps you could
suggest that we will pick up the cost of the cul de sac if he gives us the
extra Eaglebend Drive acreage for our park. See what he says. In
actuality, we are entitled to both.
F. Do you really think the Town needs more commercial?
Finally, if you all conclude that commercial zoning is necessary, do you
really feel that this zoning is compatible with single family and duplex
residences? How can neighborhood commercial be considered a low density use
2
when Burger King is the busiest place in town during some lunch hours, with
cars backed up on the street and winding their way around that small space?
No thanks. Perhaps we need a more restrictive zoning designation, but for
now, if you decide in favor of commercial zoning, I guess I am requesting
that you impose PUD zoning with only low intensity uses. To me, that means
office space -- daytime use that will not adversely affect our property
values as much. The other permitted uses create noise, smells, trash,
signage (neon?), parking lot lights.
For the record, Bill Post specifically told me that he would give up the
car wash. If he gets neighborhood commercial, will this restriction be on
the plat and referenced in all documents where the zoning is referenced?
Please confirm at the meeting that he was being truthful when he made this
statement to me and require it in all zoning designations.
3. Annexation, Development and Subdivision Improvement Agreement
Several changes would need to be made to this document depending on the
decisions in the areas above. In addition, the following are my comments:
A. I am not sure whether an additional SIA is contemplated, but I would
like to see in this document the requirement concerning the cul de sac
improvements, including adequate, landscaping, berming, other screening and
fencing. The timing of these improvements should be addressed.
B. The developer is only restricted from conveying his new development
parcels until the subdivision is complete. I suggest that he be required to
make all of his public improvements, including the cul de sac improvements,
before he can convey those parcels. He should not profit by selling those
lots until his obligations are complete. With a third party not motivated
with the huge Village at Avon project, we may never get any decent cul de
sac improvements.
C. The document says that the metro district will acquire the County
portion of Eaglebend Drive and Nottingham Ranch Road until they are
re-aligned. As an owner of properties on each of these roads, should there
not be some maintenance obligations in place before the Town owns those
roads? I would like to know how those will be kept during that process and
should there not be some time limitation on getting the improvements done?
Again, I am sure you plan another SIA with a time deadline and requirement
for security but I am sure curious as to those requirements and whether they
need to be negotiated simultaneously with this document.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I humbly request that my
letter be read and inserted into the minutes of the meeting so that my voice
can be accounted for. I will be gone from 10/18 until 10/28 and hope for
good news upon my return!
Very truly yours,
Carol Krueger
3
COLLEEN WEISS
5221 Eaglebend Drive
Avon, Colorado 81620
(970) 949-6346 (w)
(970) 926-5071 (h)
October 19, 2001
Dear Town Council and Other Representatives:
I'm going to keep this letter short as I fully support specific comments and
recommendations communicated to you in a letter from the Krueger family, who are
neighbors of mine. What I would like to focus on is the "process" of successful
development projects. Witnessing the ongoing communication between the Town,
Developer and Eaglebend residents related to the development and zoning of the
McGrady Acres has truly opened my eyes to why certain development projects are
successful and why others take years to accomplish and don't meet the end desires of all
involved, including the developer's profits.
I have never been more proud of my employer. I have worked for East West
Resorts for over 7 years and have witnessed the development of many successful projects
by our sister company, East West Partners. I know from observing their team members,
who include Charles Madison, Ross Bowker, James Telling, and Dick Funk that the
projects which are most successful receive input and buy-in, not only from the town
officials and regulatory agencies involved but more importantly, the community members
being affected. Understanding that nobody gets all of what they want, I have observed
that the citizens, town and the developer are all rewarded through this process.
I am disappointed that at this stage of the McGrady Acres project there is not full
effort by all parties involved to come up with a plan that will meet the end desires of
those involved. Knowing how passionate the residents of Eaglebend are on just a couple
of the development issues, I don't understand why there is such resistance to meet their
requests.
I believe the definition of a successful development project is one that meets the
needs and desires of those touched by it....
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
0 Colleen Weiss
0 •
Hello everyone,
Sorry I can't attend tonight's meeting, but-not that-sorry,-I'-m in-
Greece. I'd just like to say my piece about our endeavor. I still do
think lot 3 and mike Bowen's lot 6 should be residential but since it
looks like we can have one (the cul-de-sac) or the other (residential
zoning) I vote for the cul-de sac!
That being said, I'd like to thank all off you council members
and all the town staff for listening to our side and truly considering
the arguments. I'd like to thank bill post and his staff for their
considerations also.
It's been fun and as long as we get our cul-de-sac I'll be happy.
thanks again,
buz
r?l N 6??--
q--Z,(-o 1 0
SEF 21
TOWN OF AVON
0
I am a resident of Avon, on Eaglebend Drive, and am feeling under represented by my
Town's elected officials and staff with respect to Traer Creek, LLC's proposed
development. I don't understand the argument that the residents of Eaglebend Drive have
to choose either a cul-de-sac or residential zoning, but cannot have both. Most
municipalities require a developer to mitigate its impacts on surrounding neighborhoods
as much a possible. That means Traer Creek should be required to take all reasonable
steps to maintain the nature of the Eaglebend neighborhood, both in terms of traffic and
type of use.
Traer Creek is the entity that is changing the nature of Nottingham Ranch Road, so
why should it now be able to claim that it needs a change of zoning of its McGrady Acres
property because it will be near a busy road? Bill Post told an Eaglebend resident that
she was being selfish to require that the McGrady Acres property remain residential,
because it will require the buyers of that property to live near a busy road. However,
those new residents will consciously choose that option. When the current residents of
Eaglebend Drive bought their houses, they relied on the residential zoning of the
neighboring property. It is more unfair to make the current residents live near a
commercial development, when they have a reasonable expectation that the neighboring
property will remain residential, than it is to let future purchasers choose whether or not
to live near a busy street. In reality, Traer Creek is selfishly protecting its own interests
by demanding commercial zoning for its McGrady Acres property. If Traer Creek can
change the zoning to commercial, Traer Creek will improve the value of its McGrady
Acres property to the detriment of the property values and enjoyment of the existing
residents of Avon on Eaglebend Drive. As a result, the current residents of Eaglebend
Drive will pay for Traer Creek's impacts to Nottingham Ranch Road and Traer Creek's
McGrady Acres property will benefit from them.
In fact, if Traer Creek can obtain approval of the cul-de-sac and commercial zoning,
Traer Creek will obtain a significant windfall with its McGrady Acres property. I would
like to point out that contrary to its claims, Traer Creek is benefited by the cul-de-sac.
Based on Traer Creek's own plans, Traer Creek will have 1/3 of an acre more land
available for development by installing a cul-de-sac instead of a through street on
Eaglebend Drive. Consequently, Traer Creek will win a stunning victory by turning low
value residential land (that it had to acquire in order to make Nottingham Ranch Road a
much busier street) into high value commercial land. Meanwhile, Bill Post is touting
Traer Creek's generosity in building a cul-de-sac, but fails to point out that Traer Creek
will now be developing an extra 1/3 of an acre.
If the Town of Avon is tempted to approve commercial zoning for the McGrady
Acres property in its constant search for new revenue sources, I would rather that the
Town did some belt tightening. For instance, I would rather the Town manage its growth
responsibly than throw a Fourth of July party for the entire valley. Basing land use
approval decisions solely on fiscal considerations will insure that Avon becomes the
"poster child for growth management in Colorado." F-- FF ---- -
L
DI
r,- 2
TOWN OF AVON `
I am feeling under represented by the Avon Town council and staff because the
Town is making it difficult for the Eaglebend residents to participate in the land use
approval process. When Eaglebend residents appear at meetings involving Traer Creek's
approvals, we are not allowed to speak and are told to come to the next meeting. When
we show up at the next meeting, we are still not allowed to voice our concerns, because
the agenda has changed without notifying us. The Town knows that the residents of
Eaglebend are interested in this matter and should make every effort to keep us informed
and involved. In addition, the Town should require Traer Creek to supply the residents of
Eaglebend Drive with its proposals and submittals in advance of the meetings. We are at
a disadvantage at these meetings because we are not allowed to speak and we do not have
complete information.
In addition, the Town planning staff has been extremely unhelpful in providing
information to the residents of Eaglebend about Traer Creek's development approvals.
Moreover, why hasn't the planning staff required Traer Creek to conduct a traffic study?
Why hasn't the planning staff required Traer Creek to compare the cost of the cul-de-sac
to the cost of rerouting Eaglebend Drive? Why hasn't the planning staff discovered that
Traer Creek's latest proposal allows 1 /3 of an acre more of development? It is my
impression, that the Town's staff has been given the sole goal of finding new sources of
funding for the Town. However, this is a short sighted and ill advised approach. As a
resident of the Town of Avon, I do not feel that this represents my interests.
In conclusion, I urge each of the Avon Town Council members to require Traer Creek
to mitigate all of its impacts to the Eaglebend neighborhood by building the cul-de-sac
and by retaining the single-family/duplex residential zoning of the McGrady Acres
property. In addition, l request that the Town and Traer Creek be required to provide me
and any other requesting resident with complete and timely information regarding Traer
Creek's development plans and approvals so that I may meaningfully participate in the
process. Finally, l ask the Town to rethink its primary goal of finding new funding
sources and take a more balanced and thoughtful approach to growth in the valley.
Thank you.
Kristi Ferraro
3860 Eaglebend Drive
P.O. Box 145
Avon, Colorado 81620
ferrarop,vail.net
949-1944
11
C7
October 8, 2001
Mayor Judy Yoder
Town of Avon
Avon, CO
Dear Mayor:
Much has been discussed on the zoning of the McCrady Acres land at the end of
Eaglebend drive. Mr. Post has explained that it is good planning to have commercial
space next to a busy street. I have argued that residential lots are appropriate. I wanted
to formalize my thinking in a letter.
• Traer Creek purchased three marginal residential lots in order to get land for the
new Post Boulevard. I argue that these lots were marginal because they were
each bisected by Eaglebend drive and as such I am sure Traer Creek's cost basis
is quite low.
¦ These lots are losing some of their value because Traer Creek is using them for
their intended purpose of building a major road - Post Boulevard.
• Traer Creek is now trying to maximize the value of their land by rezoning it to
commercial use. In essence they are trying to increase the value of their
residential land by building a busy road.
¦ Traer Creek argues that there will be a buffer between the commercial and
residential, the current pocket park. I believe that the current buffer between
commercial and residential, the train tracks, is a much more effective buffer than
a 70 foot wide park.
• The current residents on Eaglebend purchased thinking that residential lots would
be their neighbors, undoubtedly their land and home values will decrease once
they back up to a commercial center.
I do not believe that Avon needs additional commercial space at this time. Chapel
Square, which is a nice looking mixed-use project, is not fully leased up. If in fact
WalMart does move to the Village at Avon then additional commercial space in the core
of Avon will be empty. I do not believe we need to move the full commercial core of
Avon one mile east.
My suggestion is that Traer Creek subdivide Lot 3 into three residential lots off of the
new cul-de-sac at the end of Eaglebend drive. In addition, the town of Avon should
"swap" the current pocket park land for land on the east side of the new Lot 3, with
parking available on the new stub road. The relocated pocket park will provide a good
buffer from Post Boulevard for these new residences. The three relocated residential lots
will be larger than the previous lots (I believe they will be in excess of one-half acre
each). They will not be great lots, but will be equivalent to the lots that Traer Creek
purchased.
In essence:
• The purchasers of these lots will know what they are purchasing, with a major
road 70 feet from their back yard (which is much farther than homes on Rghway
6).
• The current residents' home values will not decrease, as they will have residential
lots for neighbors.
• Traer Creek will get what they want, a widened Post Boulevard. They will also
have three salable lots of close equivalent to the lots they purchased.
• The Town of Avon will not have as much excessive commercial space approved.
Please give this idea some thought. I believe it is best for the neighborhood, for the
Town of Avon and for the immediate area.
Sincerely,
Craig A. Ferraro
Cc: Council Members 0
1?1
N. F. Anthony Seibert
4220 Eaglebend Drive
Avon, CO 80620
October 22, 2001
TO: ALL AVON TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS
RE: EAGLEBEND DRIVE CUL-DE- SAC
Dear Council Members:
Before my retirement to Eaglebend Drive, in all my 30 years of real estate development on the
Front Range, I was never blessed by such a weak willed, willy-nilly and courageousless Town
Council.
In the 11 years that I have lived on Eaglebend Drive, l have seen most of the changes. For the
most part it has been a pleasant, quiet neighborhood, off the beaten path. Once Hurd Lane was
opened up, traffic picked up, the bus started, and the residents felt the need for speed bumps to
slow down vehicles. Just imagine the traffic that we will have on Eaglebend Drive if a cul-de-sac
doesn't go in. Are we Avon's stepchild, or what? Isn't it enough that the land behind us will be
overdeveloped to such an extent that our property values and quality of life will be greatly
impacted? I am in adamant opposition to re-zoning to commercial, and strongly feel that the
Council should require to developer to be a good neighbor.
You, as Council members, have to realize that what YOU decide the developers must do - he will
do. He will hire local attorneys to cajole and threaten, but he will most likely not follow through
and actually litigate because doing so costs time, money, and creates considerable ill will with
parties from whom he will need help in the future. Neither will he walk away - he has entirely
too much invested to even consider such action. So stop trying to mediate. Protect the
neighborhood's residences by buffering them with a park and more residential zoning, and
mandate that the developer build the cul-de-sac at his expense.
You do not have to appease the developer - he is NOT your constituent. We - the residents of
Eaglebend are!
Very truly yours,
N. F. Anthony Seibert
11
CAROL and JOHN KRUEGER
5200 Eaglebend Drive
BEN and CELINE KRUEGER
5198 Eaglebend Drive
Avon, Colorado 81620
(970) 476-7646 (w)
(970) 949-1198 (h)
October 17, 2001
Dear Town Council and Other Representatives:
r t r! r'
L t
Tr. h,
Y OFAVpN
Unfortunately, I will be out of town for the McGrady Acres meeting on October 23,
2001, and I speak for the owners of the residences listed above. Since I will be gone, I feel
compelled to write to urge you to represent our neighborhood during the decisions which will be
made at that meeting. Three issues will be addressed at that meeting: (1) Final Plat reflecting
road realignment, new developer lots and cul de sac; (2) re-zoning to neighborhood commercial,
and (3) Annexation, Development and Subdivision Improvement Agreement. The following are
my thoughts on each of these 3 issues:
1. Final Plat.
The neighborhood did not get to see this document much in advance of the public hearing
even though the Town told the developers and the neighbors to get together to work on it and 40
even though Bill Post told me before the meeting that the planner was working on a residential
layout (in addition to a commercial layout). There were no such meetings, and we have never
seen a plan for residential subdivision. The Town Council gave preliminary approval to the plat
even though it reduced the size of the park from the prior submission where Eaglebend Drive
continued through to the new Post Boulevard. When the cul de sac was added, the developer
decided to take the additional acreage (more than 1/3 acres) for himself which would otherwise
have been used for Eaglebend Drive (confirmed by 4.1(c) of the A,D,SIA). Land that we
thought might be used as a buffer between the cul de sac and the new developer lots got taken.
Residential lots of that size have sold for between $200,000-300,000. I doubt that construction
of the cul de sac will cost that much. Why does the developer get this windfall?
Do we like the plan? With no park buffer between the cul de sac and the new lots, there
is very little room to put a berm, landscaping or other screening. Norm says there may be about
10 feet. He says that, although he interprets the code to require a 25 foot setback of the
developer buildings from the cul de sac, the developer will most likely request a variance to the
usual rear setback, which is 10 feet. We are against such a variance. Our requests for protection
from the proposed commercial uses are not new. Our neighborhood petition specifically requests
these items. Bill Post says he does not want to put up the Berlin wall. But we could be looking
straight down our street to the rear of a strip mall with loading docks, parking lot lights and
dumpsters. We could be listening to "Welcome to McDonald's, may I help you?" 24 hours a day.
Why wouldn't we want as much buffer as possible and some type of visual and other screening?
Town Council and Other Representatives
October 17, 2001
Page 2
2. Re-Zoning.
Obviously, the plat issue goes hand in hand with the zoning. We want the developer lots
to remain residential and join our street at the end of our cul de sac. Then the buffer and
screening issues go away. Our petition made this clear from the start. No new requests. I will
even be happy to give the developer the extra Eaglebend Drive acreage to build on if he would
join our neighborhood (some neighbors may disagree and still push for a larger park).
I have always felt at least as strongly if not more strong about the zoning than about the
cul de sac. Of course, I live 2 doors down from what could be a 24 hour car wash or restaurant.
Not all neighbors on our street will be as impacted. Their property values will not go down like
mine will. Why should I bear the consequences of the developer bringing a busy street next to
his own property? He only bought that property to have room to build Post Boulevard. If you
think this property is key to his development, I think you are mistaken. Here is my quick list on
the zoning matter:
A. By keeping the zoning residential, you maintain the values and expectations of
not only the existing owners, but the developer who purchased subject to that zoning.
B. Any owner purchasing residential property along the busy street will know in
advance what they are getting. With commercial zoning, we are forced to live next to
commercial uses never anticipated to be there.
C. You should not make your decision based on the statement of the Lot 6 owner
that he may go for commercial zoning. He does not have that zoning and we will fight that even
harder. There will be no park to buffer us from that commercial, and the impact on us will be
doubled once commercial is on all tracts adjacent to us. From my perspective, the owner of Lot
6 has a bigger beef with his situation than Traer Creek because the busy road was imposed on
him. However, if the value of his property is affected by that road, the owner of Lot 6 can and
will be compensated (I promise you) for those damages.
D. I am not impressed by the developer's statement that he does not have a good plan
for residential due to the requirement that he must give the Lot 6 owner an access easement. The
developer's installation of the new road and its new grade causes the access for Lot 6 to be in this
new location. His own property needs to bear that impact. Since he is getting the extra
Eaglebend Drive acreage, he actually comes out better than if Eaglebend Drive went through.
Even if his layout for residential is not ideal, it is a sacrifice that he will willingly make in the
end for the bigger project.
Town Council and Other Representatives
October 17, 2001
Page 3
E. I also do not believe the developer when he says that he will not build the cul de
sac if he is forced to keep his property residential. Play that hand and request the cul de sac and
residential zoning. He will not fight you because he has bigger and better things to do. This is a
standard requirement for developers to pay for the impacts of their new development. In
addition, if his property is residential, the cul de sac benefits that property. Note at your last
meeting, Bill avoided answering your question whether he would keep the property residential if
we scrap the cul de sac. He will keep the cul de sac, no matter what the zoning. Perhaps you
could suggest that we will pick up the cost of the cul de sac if he gives us the extra Eaglebend
Drive acreage for our park. See what he says. In actuality, we are entitled to both.
F. Do you really think the Town needs more commercial?
Finally, if you all conclude that commercial zoning is necessary, do you really feel that
this zoning is compatible with single family and duplex residences? How can neighborhood
commercial be considered a low density use when Burger King is the busiest place in town
during some lunch hours, with cars backed up on the street and winding their way around that
small space? No thanks. Perhaps we need a more restrictive zoning designation, but for now, if
you decide in favor of commercial zoning, I guess I am requesting that you impose PUD zoning
with only low intensity uses. To me, that means office space -- daytime use that will not
adversely affect our property values as much. The other permitted uses create noise, smells,
trash, signage (neon?), parking lot lights.
For the record, Bill Post specifically told me that he would give up the car wash. If he
gets neighborhood commercial, will this restriction be on the plat and referenced in all
documents where the zoning is referenced? Please confirm at the meeting that he was being
truthful when he made this statement to me and require it in all zoning designations.
3. Annexation Development and Subdivision Improvement Agreement
Several changes would need to be made to this document depending on the decisions in
the areas above. In addition, the following are my comments:
A. I am not sure whether an additional SIA is contemplated, but I would like to see
in this document the requirement concerning the cul de sac improvements, including adequate,
landscaping, berming, other screening and fencing. The timing of these improvements should be
addressed.
B. The developer is only restricted from conveying his new development parcels
until the subdivision is complete. I suggest that he be required to make all of his public
improvements, including the cul de sac improvements, before he can convey those parcels. He
should not profit by selling those lots until his obligations are complete. With a third party not
0
Town Council and Other Representatives
October 17, 2001
Page 4
motivated with the huge Village at Avon project, we may never get any decent cul de sac
improvements.
C. The document says that the metro district will acquire the County portion of
Eaglebend Drive and Nottingham Ranch Road until they are re-aligned. As an owner of
properties on each of these roads, should there not be some maintenance obligations in place
before the Town owns those roads? I would like to know how those will be kept during that
process and should there not be some time limitation on getting the improvements done? Again,
I am sure you plan another SIA with a time deadline and requirement for security but I am sure
curious as to those requirements and whether they need to be negotiated simultaneously with this
document.
Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I humbly request that my letter be read
and inserted into the minutes of the meeting so that my voice can be accounted for. I will be
gone from 10/18 until 10/28 and hope for good news upon my return!
V trul ours, /
Carol Krueger
I?1
E
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Thru: Bill Effing, Town Manager
From: Norman Wood, Town Engineer
Anne Martens, Assistant Town Engineer
Date: November 8, 2001
Re: Resolution No. 01 - 35, Approving the Final Plat, A Resubdivision of Lot 51, Block 1,
Wildridge, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (2460 Saddleridge Loop)
Summary: ASSO Inc., owner's of Lot 51, Block 1, Wildridge, have submitted a Final Plat to
resubdivide Lot 51, Block 1, Wildridge, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado. This is a
Duplex Subdivision of a developed lot, creating Duplex lots 51 A and 51 B. The Subdivision
is in conformance with the Title 16 of the Avon Municipal Code, Subdivisions.
Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 01 - 35, Series
of 2001, A Resolution Approving the Final Plat, a Resubdivision of Lot 51, Block 1, Wildridge,
Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, subject to completion of technical corrections to be
approved by staff.
Town Manager Comments:
11
C:Oocuments and Setbngs\nwoodlLocal SettingsUemporary Intemet Fles\OLKZL51BiWR.doc
TOWN OF AVON
RESOLUTION NO.01- 35 Is
Series of 2001
A RESOLUTION APPROVINTOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO.
BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE,
WHEREAS, ASSO Inc. have submitted a Final Plat for a Resubdivision of Lot 51, Block 1,
Wildridge, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, the Final Plat has been reviewed by the Town Staff; and
WHEREAS, the Final Plat was found to be substantially in conformance with Title 16 of the
Avon Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the proposed subdivision complies with the requirements for consideration as a
Final Plat.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN
OF AVON, that the Final Plat for A Resubdivision of Lot 51, Block 1, Wildridge, Town of
Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, is hereby approved by the Town of Avon subject to:
The completion of technical corrections as identified by Town Staff.
ADOPTED THIS DAY OF , 2001.
TOWN COUNCIL
TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO
Judy Yoder, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kris Nash
Town Clerk
E
CADocuments and Settings\nwood\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LK2\L51B1 WRresdl35.doc
Memo
To:
Thru:
From:
Date:
Honorable Mayor and Town Council
Bill Efting, Town Manager
Norm Wood, Town Engineer"/
Anne Martens, Assistant Town Engineer k?k
November 8, 2001
Re:-- - --Metcalf Gulch Lower Drainage Improvements--- - ---- - -- --- Site Resource Management, Inc. - Construction Contract
Summary: Five Bids were received in response to our Advertisement
for Bids for the Metcalf Gulch Lower Drainage Improvements Project. The five bids
received ranged from $522,926.00 to $894,104.28 with an engineer's estimate of
$484,688.59. These Bids are summarized on the attached Bid Summary Sheets. The
lowest bid was non-conforming, therefore Site Resource Management, Inc., from Eagle,
Colorado submitted the Low Responsible Bid of $551,926.82. We have reviewed the Bid
submitted by Site Resources Management, Inc. and find it to be reasonably consistent with
the Engineer's Estimate and the other Bids received. We do not see any unreasonable
discrepancies in the various unit prices to indicate potential problems or an unbalanced
bid.
Revised Project Budget is being proposed to deal with the bids being more than the
engineers estimate. If this contract is approved it will be reflected in the revised CEP
Budget at the next regular council meeting. The additional funds will come from the
Water Fund. The proposed revised Project Budget is as follows:
Construction Contract $552,000
Engineering Design $ 50,000
Easements & R/W $ 5,000
Contract Administration $ 25,000
Administration/Permit Fees $ 8,000
Contingency 60,000
Total Proposed Budget $700,000
C
1AEngineering\C1P\Stor nwater Metcalf-1\4.0 Construction Docs\4.4 Construction ContractWemo Bid Award.Doc
Subsequently, we recommend approval of the Bid submitted by Site Resources
Management, Inc., in the amount of $ 551,926.82 for construction of the Metcalf Gulch
Lower Drainage Improvements Project, contingent upon receipt of Authorization to
proceed from CDOT.
Financlal Implications: The current Project Budget is $560,000 and
the revised project budget being proposed by separate action is $700,000. If this contract
is approved it will be reflected in the revised CIP Budget at the next regular council
meeting. The additional funds will come from the Water Fund. The revised project
budget will include Site Resource Management, Inc. Construction Contract for the amount
of $551,926.82.
Recommendations: Approve Bid submitted by Site Resource
Management, Inc., in the amount of $ 551,926.50 for construction of the Metcalf Gulch
p - -
Lower Drainage hn rovements Pro ec?and authorize issuarice-of Natice7-of-Aw
Project contingent upon receipt of Authorization to proceed from CDOT.
Town Mana er Comments:
vvA l'Oei .
•
2
IAEngineeringU tormwater Metcalf-1W.0 Construction Docs\4.4 Construction ContractWemo Bid Award.Doc
j W W W W W W W P W N N N N N N -1 1 O 7
W V W N O U J. W N -+ O m V O) N i. W N
d (? QN ?d f1 QN (1 t7N QN
S _
m c 9 D g@ Y g ? ? Q ? J Ca m a A f QF ?? 0 m ? m ?n c? G) O
CL o J 'n 12 j w
Q m Q Q m m s rn m (n m "' n =; m m to ?yp0. m m C
N h m m 2 ?, m STi D O 1,. n a ". o O 0
m to m 3 q? S m I a. m x J m£ O -. 100
8 S_ 1 m (/ m C X d A
O O C S p m p? _} C?j t.Z f7 = j
4 V ?. O } O Ot $ f0 ?i p 0) 3? jF y n3i TI o _ fb1
§ m + i (n 9 N m x n m L,
a - 8 a 8 m Z g m - a a W 1QeS = a p -0 y€ Z
01 m Fn dpi m{Q `}o}j $}+j S® $ T ?n n 6 0 T
Q C.V m m}7
P? + d N
(D ID
?+ G 4
c -? m
?? (?a1 N wrn_ O
... ?D ?-"DADA AONDN Q~i (vN? -?_. OOWDC ?... I 0 CD
G N N? 1AJ (?Tr11 ??T17 m? AA .'ct
in (n tnD ?n?_[? k ?1TT 7<7<p ?IfnDD T'11 cn V)?D?1Tltoto
a fA VI N a bq fA EA 6A M b? 6A fm in 69 69 69 fA 69 6A H 69 69 69 6D H 6A df 6A fr1 6A
1
o
CT
CD ?Wp co AOD pNp W W W W N OCpn pW OpA U7 N pA pp n 3
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O f71 V p O N O O p O 00 O O W O Ao N p p p O a m T
?_--__ -O?-?j--m_-VQ -O_O..__ _..0 0-00-X0.-0-__-?p._
y Z fD
w
M H H 6A 609 M H M b! H EA 0)0904
6A 6q 69 69 6A 69 fA 69 EA N H M H H 69 fA 4A
p O
N _ f?.1 m CE O ("
PP N N W W V ON UI 0 V M (A 0D jW VOA 3 W ("' I_
!.J W GDM((,ph NON OtDN W jO pW (??1 WA00 8-4 V cVp pA p? (?O O
00 P) 7 O O O O
03 -+ W O V 71 0 0 0 N OD O W O O S A N O O.+ 0 O O .a?. T O
W
0 C o0 C) O 0C C) OGO 0o0 NCOO CC 00G100bD6 ? ?Z
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 00
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O
-? H d1 69 H69HH lA 41a 6A 6A 61 V)6AH H6A f9 fiq EA W 6969H 69 H(A H69 C n o 00
w ,??aa O o Z
O N A? N -+ N V O ct
Z ??
f)t OD V OD -4 pAp A Ou poi O G7 O
W ND N OCV/1?-+ 000 ON.UW7 N C O) ( W i1NNONi -+-+ t.NDAA(Mii? s? O G1Z
(D O C OA<D f0 <G tp fp (.f {,17 (pp OD V- J? 'V O Opp V AOD A O -I 0 T
(D N O U70 tJ1 ()1 A. A A N01N fr ?0o O N W 0) W W 00 A Of0 ? co co
M fA 6A N 6A K yq 6°) 6A 60 69 0) 69 b 6046 f9 69 V) fA 6A 6A 4q 61 M f9 M 69 M <A d'/ ^?' 0 C
4' cn m
to O CA -4 1 N A D > NJp Wa? A? NOj 0CWi CpWf+p1 V ON A N W O V O 4 Z
pNN O W O TN W Q? A OtO -NT LI00 P NNE pNpDp co
(ND Apppp ??C"pO 1. O V pp -4 -4 41 J? C.
V t(DD (p 0 )it O (1 OOD D 00 ON? SCD N co ONM ON W 0)) AO Cp T TA gbp .,p OD wa
C) co
fA 6A 6% 4A 6A4A 69 6A46 41 6A 6A46 MU 69 N6A 69H dtvo 6A 69 H 6A NHH 6A
?1 tD
0
-+ O .i ID
QN?? N ! ppN (,,) pp pO p? Op r
C
O O D O CCn cn W W W V V V NAO AOO O O O C O AU'Wl W N C O ?+ 6 6 0 0 $ 0000 000 ?ul ? UT OO 06 6 6 00 O(DO 0?°oo
N 6A Vq 69 6A 6A 6A fA EA 4A fA 69 69 Vq 6A f9 6A f9 fA 61 da 69 40 69 69 69 69 60 69 69 69
V -+ N j2 N W!! r O?.N,? AAO
W p p pp pp m
A 0 0D O WAN 40N (ODD V N MOD V (4 pp0 A0) 0 0 0 V((NDp 0000
0) O O O 0000 NA0 V -+M pV? (D QO 0990 CS) 00 0M 00(0 ()1OMC) p
A S O O O O O O 0 0 0 O co CO A O 0 0 O O 0 0 0000_00
~
EA 69 64 61 6A fA 6A to fA 69 Gm 69 6A M 6A N 69 H 69 69 Vq 69 69 61 69 6A fA fA V1 N C
0D LZ ('') co N - -+ N (n O
Ln 0)
p Op _(W.?((pp QD? VO V(? O_
O O (p(A C co ()W W W W W CNn(N)1 co rn NSA ?0]
O O O O OO 0 0 0 0 0 088 W 0) (0)1 00 0 5 0) OO O A S V V S S m?
M
M 6A w H (A fA HM fA 64 Vq 61 69 V) 4A 696A 6160 Vi (A M6AM4A HH. H. ?
ap 3
OD f N A ... 0 0 j .a. _ 7
OD
co W O pp (??t!(pp -+OA V M OD N(Q(Qpp-?? ?A(A}11 -+N OD W -+fVD VOppp1O On
4 CC)
V O O (NflD OW00DA AODV 000 O V O W A(OJ1A N W V-40
(l1?Ln Li
W 0 0 0 0M00 000 000 480 0000 OD 0o?ooLt0
Y
v
6
m
n
CD
g
0
a
G
w
po y o V C N to N N Ut N N N A A A D. A A A A
N r Co N iT Cn A 4W N -? i0 Go V G1 iT A 4.1 IJ IC
m N 0) n (7 m Cl A? 07 n C7 d
- C v o m 'tg1 s-1 rtl 2 r Itt m N Z C m m m D D W
s E; PL
m ? ct
6 Y n$ °? E V ,g fi 7 a m; A O ^Aj 7?1
p IS
RAP
D O m N m
& D $ -i p W
00
?N?pp 77
V W O ID V 00 r (O?'OD W W W V CA C C
j ?? r NCTS V ?0 C0T OCTON DD?
A
O W co O w
rcn to -{-1 N n to tonto mN r- r- to 0000
N y Cn Cn 'T TI n T in O ;C { < < D D
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N H
W SO O A00 tT Cn0N+A 00" NOO 0 (AC0 DD
N N O _ p p p p p p
OO S S° Q) 00 Ul O CAAASO OO OOS O SSSO
N I N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
W
0
A
V
Oo W
O ?
(O -? N
CT
A ul
f0 W Un to
W
S O t O V
00 ?V?Tn UI O co
w
N cpp O
O?
p
cn
S
GT
A
co 0
tT
i
0
U
S O S O S co O S S S COn 0) 0 0 00
ro -
l?
N N N H N N N N m
A-+-? O ACT A ?Z`?? O
f"tJ
? o 00o cn (w? DDS ?p
Q?
Q
?00 00 NPT V T ??
S o o O O S S S
T O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N
r
O
O
O
A
O
O
-+ O V A _
-?
W A
V•
N A
V 0
0 O 1
V
VIV N WW?COA W V
-
+ 0 V O
N N H N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N
{
! W
N N N? NN w -+A V fJ? V Nw
? O tT N V p] A V W S W
,
, W O W O N S A (A V W W t0
j
0
0 A
J ST W ANS (
.1
A W 4u CO COT co VCWn
N N 0
0 .
N N N N N (N N N o o m
O oZ
?WW v
O
co DD
W
V
O
O
?
N
N
W V N N t
D CT W
0
N r
N N N N N N N N ?»
;
Q
CTN?
W V N'+C
A
W p
DDfj C
p j r ?
N
S .?
p r W W N
V O
N Cp N?0m
0
V
N N N N N N N N 3
to
-+ (J1 fJ
vNio?
N
o00o
DD?
,??,
O C C
O
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 b
0 0
N N N N N N N N w,
V N W N CT A b
w (
V
N
maCT W
DDp
o CO
CT A OoO WO
00o rn 50?n Vrn
8 o
e
00 0 o
o
o
1 -
i
1
sO
.0
,Z
N N N
CT
W N O
CVT - O
m
v 0 o
z
0 to
m
O
N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N
W
W
CT N
?
cntn CWT SO O 000 V -'00 A ON
O O O 0 0 0 O
8-8-
S
0
C
T(n O
O
N
NI INI NN N NN N NNN N NNNN NN
W W N
000 000 A W W OD CT CT O O W A
_ W o co QD A b m W
yo W a,
o0
°v rn° O W +Oo cc A
w
'OD 0 0 O N S O
O p
O S
v V p p S 0 O CT S
NI INI NW N
f
CD O
f N N
fD co co
O O
N N
0 S
?
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
co
O O O
0- V
CT
A N ? O
O) WO CT -?O SO) O W
OOCO O ?'O SCn ON
N N N N N N N N N N N N N
A 0 O A N O A N A 00 -+ V
co IJ W O
' W V W M W Cn W
0 Cn O C
N CT CT co OD A W O CT
0 0o O co Q?N Cn 0NO W ON
000 0 ?5? So
0co a)
N N N N N N N N
w N 0
N
N
N 000 D ?
ti
J1
C
V N 0 W
O S O O O S S O ?
m
%
{
7
N N N N N N N N
3
Z ? o m
V CA ?Q w mac ?A DD»
O W O
V N
N W W W V C71
00
5
A
C
T Lnn 0
O O O O S O O O
9
O
VJ
9
d
m
m
S
b
2
ga
to
ri
F
g
k
CA
0 Cn P tJ N + O 0
?
D
v D D 0 a O g
m a o o m
Z
?
N 66
?G
? Tl B
_
0 -
Yg
c m
p
;
0
v
r
W S
O O ;u
T m n? $ -6 & 7?c ° ICTI
0
g
m?
u-
I it v
-
, w
z z M S A ai z
Z $ m
, n' 7
m Z
o
O m
v m N n
O
1 z
d
-q
;z
b) D
° D 0 a
O d
a
n ? r? r
<D TD T
-? n H N H H n
? SAD $D
S 9 o 0
N 1 H N N H
m
o AZ
D OAOjz
y 0
o
O O p
O S O
6) H N N
C?D V
N OD (N Z
O N A W
S N V CA.)
401 1N1 H N H H IN
tDZ CTS 0
' N
Cp?p CQ V V D -Nj D 00
0
A 1 +
N 0
o Oo COl1 N
N Q
p
N S CJ/ O co
.Oj
H N H H
mD
D
GOO
W
S
V Gn
O
O
p
p
N 0 O O
0000 0 0 O O ------ --- -
fD do V T U. A W IJ + O
@ o D v m
O GL ri) 8oN Z
z
? wWWW?,w?$ ?'?? v
+ ; m
v N g rn? G
o ?rN?111 m n
z vN? O
_ Z
n
M a z
m F
x4
Oda O
O -0
z
0
O
?WNA WCN
?Na
N L"
OoA A Co O ?j vD?p
0)cnCD yco y ozp
H H H H H H H M
_ rl
0 co D r
00)0) 0 O
C/1
?SooSS $ $
401 H H N H N H H H
N
N -+N Nw W ZN
A. j W oo 0o Cpn C -? D V
V + W O V O O N (-?
O _O _O O 00 O O _O O O
H N N N H H H .
-?+C(Opp C(Opp OCCN,?1) NDA
Cn UOi A.P NO) O N
NI HHHHNH H H
NA) A A A N
W AO48_'App? IvD(r
N co 00N.P? ? g
J _O O v N O m T N
H N H H N H H H a: PO
ww 00DDo
ONw W 4-4 cn (N?
0000 al CCn S 0
N H N H Z (A Z H N H H N H N H N H 6m
N? D D
N -` N m N N N ??+ fD O Z N
N N O O p tl00 O W V W tppJ?? Cb A A D T
N N tD W O O 0 Fo O o N A V j 0A N
O co O O O O GI Cl) 000 0 CT co 0 N
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 O (A
l
H H Z N N H N H N H N N
D D
v Z
o °m wo
N N
S
N M EA w Z to Z
D D «'
m ? rn =1s
? + W
N
N A v
W W W CD
C
T
00 C T
N1 D 4
N N CT1 D co
W W ww U)UI V O
CA CT G1 Ch 00 N O
0 0 0 0 0 0 U) O
N1 1N1 HNHHH CA H H
O
N
(W?
A
? OD
N
W
N _ _ .? 0
? ? .... O
mNA?N fD
CO 0A A coo O O CI1 Z
V D ....
A O
m N
W W O 00000 C0.1 O
O CD 0 p O ?
W N •
CD D
O
o CD C
?G X10
?
0
$g
o
Z o
m
A "
::I
m g
z 0
D
Cn A t
N cm CA O
5D p n c
n n 3
H H H
o 0 0?
O 0
C) c
D
r
a
N N N H m c)
G
v n 3 ? Q
c x
S 0 •
0
o OS S M Tv g
L2 J N
m O m G
m z
H H N n
Cb N m
°oZ 00
T
A s 3a
n? ± Z
?O
O
COp (WT (
W
O O ??j{
? p+ Z
T
A N I1
C 'L' O
N
N
NN
N
"? V
<
z m
m
A o cc q
?? YC
(
W, V W b
Q
^
q y
V rD CA O
M
W
l=j A
W
L= AO?N 0 *
^
H N
G y
?
V Cp?p1
f,)1
C7t CT
p Y
r?i. s
O C
N N N H H ?
m
w w to
30
N
N 03
N 0
W N
O O O O O
H H N
M
N
v 4
w
W C)
1 91
66 co
w
m
M
N
N N
H Cx?
W A
3
P W N to
tD tp
P
A
»
A Al A A
too j
0 co N
N
cc co
N 0 O 0
0
g
00;u W 0
z z m m
N 2 v
m
0000 c ?
? r F r z
D
gggg O
=
0 z
vovo z
m
0000 0
z z z Z { C
00000
mmmm?
-i
0000 --I z
-+9
cccc?
0000M
X0000
vZZZZ0
w4A 6.) fA4ml 1 1 11"
W -4 13 cw?pp
co ,c?p.(fDDLn NA
Nj V
$0 o,0c°c' IS
N M H 69 (AJ 1 N 1 14A
A
V, A. to
"'
"'
p p
p
N
O I I
t
t
O
O N 4 P m
i?
f,
f
V O O
W U1
A O 0
v??, W ? v> di ?I 141 I I W
O N W O O w t.
IM N N? co V I I N I I N
N 0 0 0 O V O O
to yr 69 en " 601 M 1"
N Q1 OD -` O N N
Q
)
W
N
CD W 4f
?
??pp
(
?
2w coN A A
T
c
w
h w W
n
i co
w c
O i
O Q
!
N j N
Al ?
m
o
_
?sn«
s 8
0
? o
d
p
C
< R
- - m
s Z
3
cn m ' n
o ? m
n
a
H b m G)
C
rn Ent _
° !Q m W O
1
0
0
«+ c m
gz
Z 0
D
?
n?
?O <
?Z
a g m
0
H to 0
n
m
oo
N M ? Z
w ? N
? y C
? y
O
?
A
O
° S €
°
w w C?
w
O
O O
46 4 C
? ~ W
W ?
m
M N
3
W O ^ n
V
O
f
p
rn ?A
A
cD
p
°
M
s
I
t1
7a
m
o ?
N
2
7
CL
G.
m
tT
m
ca
M
0
O
A W
A O W W W W W W W W D N N N N N N -I -.1 'a r - r + Z
V 01 N f. W N -? N 2. W 1.1 -? C tP V lA UI A W (v r G 0
d A t7 G1 V m t) fS W t1 tT d O' N
;fcp N ???' z? -cam zm ?-C) a
0? of qt ` to to _ ?Wn m q `S o _y Si _
mom
W
8 8 3 A to a; ??q m QZ ?Q(
co G 1? R
? ° m m ? fR (n
G, qD' - 6 6 S S 0 O O S CD O O O O O C f) N 0 Cl S S S 0 S 000 O 0 0 S 0
lD
fA Wf fA to fA fA 69 W el 6, fR fA fA 69 69 69 fA fA fA 69 69 fA fA fw df M M fA . .
C
N
o N U, Z
D N
oW W
a j
to Vb, c)
(ro oo
?0
O O S OooNN -+-?? V
(p
CO NNO W 000 00 000
+
NCVn V
SS
O O O OONN OOO t
p
OSA OOS DOSS OO -
p
C
SSNSS
D G.
to
,
,
`
to E/r fA fA ?
?
J1
fA t (i? fA (» f17 flf. f{3 VIn 69 $A 69 (9 69 fA fA fA fA M M N fq fA
fr
V
N
N
W Z
N (n
- '
J, CD rLt'x a?,..?
.G W _a
O
-+ N CTf O8 ID
3 S
W
V N
O fT
A
O 0 ?
t71 cU rn CD
O ?? 1? O
?? N
N W co
w CD -4
O) C? A
CD C D O
W m V M
W
N CJt W 0 0 0 0
(") O
Q?
O
O
O
O to t0 --> Y,
N L.
Co -?
o O (D
CO W O O O 00
N 0 0 0 ((?1? co
A O 0 V W O
0 V O
0 0 W !-n O •N O O
p
A
A
O
O
O
O
O
O
O ? _ 1 N
G -.-- ..
J W N
_, O C)
CD Q n co
O C) G
V -46
6 a CD O
O O O
O
O p O O 1 O p OI
L
O O O O O O 00 O O O! a O O
fA 69 M 69 fA fA fA 6'1 fA (A fA y1 69 fA fA fA EA 69 fA 69 fA fA fA 69 69 fA H H fA N C
7
s
D
...
Z
D ,p
ANfy?
NOAOA
A
AcooN
ANU1
41
OO (3) rn rn
?NN '
NN
A
tp? a
W V
C) m
cooC
(tC.J4
t
cooN WOA'
? ? t0 A ct
r
(n r
fn rZ
fn D r0ow
N ;< ;C ;< woo woo
t1 Tt
r nnr. rrmmmm
D rr rrn([77''?1rrrr C
'
'
t fn
D Tl 7n (A N C p 'n T Ul (n
fA 69 fA 69 fA M fA M H 69 fA fA 69 fA V) M fA 69 N H 6% fA fA H fA 164 . H K fA
o
°oD
o °ornrn
rnrnrn
o0o
to Vo CD
N°ooS
O zA-
o wN p
S
^_
?
-_
;
S
O
S p ?p
SO 00
000
OS
S
S
OSS S O
00 O
W 0p4t. O
O O O O
SS DOSS
N
fA
M
fA
to fA fAN
69 fA 69
69H H
696969
H161M&?
H61
w67M Mbf fAfA61
m T
?
? V ? ? r
NZ (oW jN N -
W W V W A
O0M (.1
-+W VOA N
3
3 N (
-1
co t
`'
it
O
. 5;
O
N (Oq(.JGG1 j W
O
+W
OD OR
O V
b N
SOO
T t? <J1
W -a O W
(,71 W
N
W A co V V ?tV4p -440)
p =
0
0
C, Q1-
O C I V -+
co b? ?
666 NOOO
CO W 000 AO OS
-
+
0C> 0S w m p-i
O
O
O
C. O o 0
C. O O
c o o O
000 N G O O
0 0 $ S (
}
?
S SOS SOO S N v
a+ p ,-p Z
to <n fA 69 sw to en 69 69 fn 69 0% fA 69 H fA to fA N fA fA fA fA fA H to to H fA to m v Q
lA
x V N j C O
O Z
>
Sl7>
co C4
S S S
Q? Ob
AAA
tD40
Nm0
V -?CN7t0
?-+
OCACWTO
S
8
0000000°
000
0CD(A
0CD
S00008
?o W OO
°oo°o°o°og°
S a
"0"
8
m
o
o V
(A
61
fA
4A N b'/ M
61 H 6'f
fA 4A H
69 fA Nf
fA df fA 67
eft H
fA 69 fA (A 69 fA f/'1 b1 a
C
G
m
(1t
t (J?Z
OD N V N
O
A N OoOCN) AOWO V co N .... ,
A 3 m
O o
O
O j
QC?
O
OOD co A un O4m
N V 084
t0 1t to to L-1 CD
w J 0 N A co
co tN]f O _
A
N O p :.. VW Of1?
Of OfQ
O
W
O
O
O O O UVi n
N
4 (A
O
N
O
O
fA fA fA fA 69 to fA 69 fA fA " fA fA Hi 64 69 fA 69 to 69 fA fA fA Vf 69 fA 69 fA to to W
3
z n
o
D d;
9
m
W
0
O
z
0
O
n
N
A
W
V
N
N
V1
N
to
N
W
N
W
N
V
O
0
P
I
m
0
W O G. v ?4 O1 (n N N N O 01 Cr C A A A A A A A A 0 7
N 1? O v i7) N A Z. N -+ fD O V in N A W N •
A ? d
yNn 0? ?qn (? G Cl G. l? ? ? yr gZ (e+ mZ
O Q m -A F U) z T F QZ 7 m Z 4 m f. m m m D D M
n
s m
'4O fin m ?^ K ' m E
I -n :E
R 3 ?T =
m s
m^ a
m
v 4
N 2
-4 W co ? co
V V ONE (
p
S?
pA ?o W co N"''' (?
.h N
??V DDS
000
0
r
GQ
NO
i
"'
NN
?
N
O
0 Oo tD G
rto
t m
` -?-?cn
i n fncnC7cn m5n rr
Minis N 0000
<
DD
y?o y o n n ? -<T:< 7< D C S
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N ?
:i
S S O A00 O 010?A ON
NOO
07
(11 C. D
D
NN $ O
C $Ou $ OSSo $o 0SS 0 $SSS
00 m ,
dl
N N
N
N N
N
N N N
N
N N N N
N N
N N N
N
N M N N Xm
M
J i
V
DW
O
O
N
COj
t
Ot r
A
?
O
A(r A
LZ ?ON
O
p A
?
-4
0 "-4
1 pp NN
In b
rn
W (Op
O ?
?Q
ss??
00 (
? (,J
0 co (A
V
N
°
DD..
W
m
A ((pp
(A S Sp A Oo0
o0 i1
O t
DN
N O A
0
0 OD n
W
c
0
0
m So S S(S m 00500 S (?'i18 0 °000 0
0
5 0 0SS
0 m
o
'0
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M N N N N N N N ; N
m
A
? c1
S N A
n
0
N
O p
0,
(005
A vv
N W C
T
O
? DD?
"?M + .
AA S O O (1100 0 000 (
?
p S
00 S S (°c co 00" 0 ((p
°?i 0O (
p
S N SSS O 0000 0
N NN N
N N
N
N N N
N
N N N N
N N
N N N
N
N N N
.T
A
V
W-??1
?
?W
N
?W -+
W r
V
-0)
CAA W
V
[Aj to
???
Y' o 5 S 009) S t8°m i
-4 o?
o
V pi
SS S ON oo
A SOS S (
°A S(8 S(V71 SSS O V)00
t
0
N N N N 6"949 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
.T
N N-+ zzox
c _
_ _
O
DDN
S SO O NO W co A
-+O N 5:1 00
SO (?1,1
t
SSS
0 (
(pp
N
SN
000
(11 (,11
0000
a
5 A Oo 000
0
O
N N N N N N N N N WIMHOWN&M N 'N N N m
3
W
V W N ,ODA 01 N? V ?znG
J 0 0 O Cn
O co OO A
SOS l+
W N 0
?O
co
V D D 7
W OS O O
O O O 0 O
O
O O O
S
S.
=.0 S
S
O O O O
NN N NN N NNN N NNNN NN NNN N NN Uf iA ;
w
Z
D D a
N N N N N N N N N N (AN N N N N N N N N N N N N
3
0
zz
D3; 11
1 A
i
T
?o
11
f 9
d
0
m
m
m
0
and
N
CL
m
P
c
4)
0
v
0
z
D
v
M
c
0
Z
0
z
0
n
1
_ _ _
io io 0 0 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 O -I
W N A is N -+ 0 O ? m ?o V W U A rA iN O 0
CD -V
A
,o c? g
D > ,
2°;7 ?.9.1a g @0
s4 :0 0 3 3 3 ? y? 0
p m ? m N Z -4 9, 9, 9. 9, 9, 9, 0 3 c z
a0 W 5 V y C a n1 ,[ M
::j 3
z z ? _F o
o p?g? 9 v z? "- z
D S L, N 7 z ?C a Z
m ID
0 n 0
C
19, 0 1 z
p z
0
Z (A,? +
74 ?4 ? D o D ° co p w N o w W D N o
rn
O V O
;?y .n? ? tntnfnU?fn(/? non
H H H H N H N H N N H H
m co
w N ro O G
O
g m 3 ?.
?
8 R o c
'? 9 9 cq 21
o
0
z
z. QQ
0 O
m
O d
M
0
? .m.
0
z 0
0
to
N
V A }
wp
O
)
O CA
NN 0 C
n T :<
H N H
0) O g cQ'n O>Oo 0)0)oo ODtn 0)O O o
tp ?p o
O O O S o o O 0 00 00 00 0 0$ $ 0
F
M 4j
H H AH H N 4AHH NHN H H N NH N N Q
A Z Co N ^ _ m a (?
to -+ N N W W 00) Z N N i.TC =
C? _-4 W -Como D? it N a) 3 m p
O o V -+wO V oao N W i 0 o W Or
O S O O V tJ Oao o)Op b N A 'AO O
0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O N O m
J D0 ? Z
H H H N H H N N H H H H H N H N m Do
• C
w D N D cn z rn O
0 0 0 0 0)rnAama ( 0 S c pSS o
V V pQj pz
S S S S O S CJ V O S O CO 0 x '+ m
0 0 0 0 C
O o
7lt H N H N N H N N NHN H H H N H E1} H D
?: 7 c z
?Z ?)c cn cWn w ?Np Nw0 Sf_ QNi m
4t ICA oD $D $ W
L p?
(c coo°orn ? 81) tvD aa;' o
R m y
V V co .P N j CT CO w N O) V v ,; S
O O O Oo O) O N G O iD O A G
,'1.; S O S Ja ,p
O 000000 O O O O Ord,` 0
H H (A N H H H HN40 H H N N N
C
Z
W z m
N oD 8f
C4
Cn O O O N N -? -+ tD V Q1 D 0 1 t0 O)
S O O S ??? ?A C C C) O ,y
N N O O O o O O O O a
H N AYR H N N fo E}f t!) H N N Yt15 {Ji H o
z C',
oo so A w _z to to 3 cce
° ol
A OD .-.?D o co .Ao ?1?.A ao oD,v?i A pp r? !° 0
o U) q W ,J ,.y .Hi
- O O o C A O
H H H NHHH 4AH H H HH N C
D DD a
N N N H H H H 6H H N 69 N N N N H 9
3
n
D D ?.
p
g
o
v zz? z
?n N+ m
0000 r g
0'90
o Z
9886 o
z
3- o m
000 zzzz? p °c
zzz?- 0
0
-i°mmmm z
ooooow
' -Icccag
P-OO
wooooow
vzzzzo
a
a
m
N
MHf 4R a al 1 I I"
W
tD
W V N '
,4
Z
co to U N A
tp t,? ? CT1 A_
s
l
1 CD
V A
N N
°
o
0 S
o
vV co
aH l/f to 691 1-1 1M
J
[)o tJt N? CW71 V N Cn
C.) Nw+-4CEn A A
ornwvrncn m at
(0 Cl
tYl bf 69HfA M M
w
L't ? o co W
N
-4 - t K)
Cl) r.
co al 90 -4
C4
co co
(n
m
0 0 0 0 0 O O
N 'Na N
N ? m
f
11 A x m
W '
? and
m
a
w w m c
w w S,
n n c
-<
w rn m rr?
g o ?
M
t,+ en ? m C
r
p map oO
g °o rn (?t 7mp Z
69 69 a N m 00
AC ?_ X00
b? p ?
Of m ' G) z
u S a m
0 0
6pk
ion o m
g
C
a fA
7
z
np
°o $ a
M
n
O
M O
o? w 3
O
N M ?
p
!fl t!f 6// H M N N tYi M
0