Loading...
PZC Packet 111713Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 17, 2013 Avon Town Council Chambers AVON Meetings are open to the public < Avon Municipal Building / One Lake Street Councilor's Fancher and Carroll were present for Item V, Minor Design and Development Plan. I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:05pm II. Roll Call All Commissioners were present. III. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda There were not additions or amendments to the Agenda. IV. Conflicts of Interest Commissioner Bonidy disclosed a potential conflict with Item VI, since he designed the original design plans for the Avon Elementary Doctor's office. The Commissioners agreed that he should step down for that item. Commissioner Hardy disclosed a conflict with Item VI, Master Sign Program. Her firm is currently contracted for design services for Hoffmann real estate, same owners as Tract Q property. Commissioner Losa disclosed a conflict with Item V, Minor Design and Development Plan. His firm is the applicant for Item V, Minor Design and Development Plan. V. Minor Design and Development Plan Property Location: Tract G, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Sub. Applicant: Pedro Campos, Zehren Associates / Owner: Town of Avon Councilor's Fancher and Carroll were present for Item V, Minor Design and Development Plan. Description: Pedro Campos of Zehren and Associates will present the design for improvements to the Pedestrian Mall. This review is focused on improvements from Avon Road heading west through the Pedestrian Mall to Nottingham Parking including sidewalks/paths, landscaping, plazas, activity areas, and new bronze statue locations. COMMISSIONER LOSCA RECUSED HIMSELF FROM THIS ITEM AND LEFT THE ROOM. Discussion: Pedro Campos presented the design of the project and the underlying goals which include creating a cohesive urban resort fabric taking design keys from the West Town Center and other more recent improvements. Commissioner Bonidy asked about the water feature being removed. Pedro responded that they have not fully discounted the idea of a water feature somewhere, but there were some safety concerns and concerns from Wyndham with the location as previously proposed. The idea will continue to be explored through construction documents and pricing. Commissioner Minervini asked about event tent locations in Area B of the plans. Pedro noted that there was one opportunity on Lettuce Shed Lane (LSL) and some at the end of LSL near the Bob's patio. Mayor Rich Carroll mentioned the choke -cherry trees and questioned if they were in the correct location given the programming of the space. He spoke to the water feature and the potential for another ballot question on the Recreation Center. Commissioner Prince commended the plans and supported the idea of moving the water feature toward the Recreation Center. He did not feel that there should be choke -cherry trees since the Commission has continually rejected fruit bearing trees. Commissioner Minervini also commented on the trees in Area B and asked if there were other varieties that could be used. Pedro explained that there were several tree varieties available that could punctuate the space but that they should be limited to something 15'-20' tall at maturity. He agreed to eliminate fruit bearing trees and use something evergreen or similar to the choke -cherry without fruit. Commissioner Struve was in full support of the project, and especially areas A, B, and C. He recommended using the community garden idea in Area D. He also showed support for something on the eastern wall of the Seasons building. Commissioner Bonidy recommended moving check -mate further to the south in the middle of the circular area of Area B. He also re -iterated his desire to include a water feature in the plan. Commissioner Hardy was fully supportive of the plans as they have been developed. She wanted to be sure that the lighting was adequate throughout the plan where it is needed most. Commissioner Clancy agreed with the Roundabout 4 concept for a large identity feature. He asked if the PZC would review the bronze pedestals, lighting, etc. as they did for the Hoffmann applications. Matt Pielsticker said that the details would be forthcoming. Commissioner Clancy thought that having the bronze moving is a good idea and that PZC should re -review the details. Parking is a concern in the present form and the Town should work with neighboring businesses to provide customer parking. He mentioned that the portal on west end of the project should be intuitive to invite people into and through the mall. He noted the signage plan and the lack of detail. Infrastructure for special events (i.e. water, electric) needs to be well thought out. He also supported the garden idea per Commissioner Struve's comments. Action: Commissioner Struve motioned to approve the Minor Design and Development application for the pedestrian mall as follows: Finding: The Application meets the Development Plan review criteria outlined in §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, Avon Municipal Code, as outlined in Matt Pielsticker's December 12, 2013 Staff Report. With the following condition: 1. Any substantial changes to the Design Plans must be re -reviewed and approved by PZC with a Minor Design and Development Plan application. Commissioner Bonidy requested that a condition be added stating that Staff will continue to study water feature and take a closer look at location of the check -mate bronze. Commissioner Struve (Motioner) agreed with the additional conditions. The motion was second by Commissioner Hardy. All Commissioners were in favor and the motion passed with a 5-0 vote. Commissioner Prince had left the meeting prior to motion being made. VI. Code Text Amendment - Public Hearing Property Location: Public Facilities Zone District Applicant: Jill Kovacevich, Doctors Plus, Inc. Description: The applicant is requesting an amendment to Table 7.24-1, Table of Allowed Uses, Avon Municipal Code. The amendment would add Medical/Dental offices and clinics as a Special Review Use in the Public Facilities zone district. COMMISSIONER BONIDY RECUSED HIMSELF FROM THIS ITEM AND LEFT THE ROOM. Discussion: Jill Kovacevich presented the background of SBHC's and the reasons for moving forward in the Avon Elementary School with opening services to outside siblings and community members. Commissioner Struve felt that it was a good thing, and a better set of services to patients. After further discussion and hearing the applicant's presentation he supported this use as a SRU in place of an outright permitted use. Commissioner Minervini stated that students are already getting care and it is appropriate Commissioners Hardy and Losa were in support as proposed. The public hearing was opened and closed without any comments. Action: Commissioner Minervini made a motion to approve Resolution 13-07 as drafted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Struve. All were in favor and the motion passed with a 5- 0 vote. VII. Master Sign Program Property Location: Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Property Address: 0082 Beaver Creek Blvd Applicant: Monte Park, Sign Design / Owner: Hoffmann Commercial Real Estate Description: The application is for a new Master Sign Program for the "Junction" Building, formerly known as the Benchmark Shopping Center. The program includes 14 ground level building mounted tenant signs, 2 upper level signs, and 3 monument signs. COMMISSIONER HARDY RECUSED HERSELF FROM THIS ITEMA ND LEFT THE ROOM. Discussion: Monte Park, Applicant and owners representative, presented the Hoffman's concept for the monument signs and the introduction of branding to help tie the different properties and buildings together. He explained that they would likely be back with similar signage concepts for the other properties in the near future. Commissioner Minervini asked about lighting and font opportunities for the monument tenant panels. Monte explained the light sources (one up lit directly on logo and two downcast for panels) and clarified that there would only be one font type for the tenant panels on the monument signage. Commissioner Losa liked the consistency of monument signs and the fact that the 2nd floor signage has been reduced with the proposal. Commissioners Bonidy and Minervini had no further comments. Commissioner Struve noted that the logo was representative of the one used at a casino. Action: Commissioner Bonidy motioned to approve the application as submitted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Struve. All were in favor and the approval motion was passed with a 5-0 vote. VIII. Consent Agenda • December 3, 2013 Meeting Minutes Action: Commissioner Struve motioned for approval and the motion passed 6-0, with co Commissioner Minervini abstaining due to his absence from the December 3, 2013 meeting. ca e_ X. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 8:02 APPROVED on the 7th Day of January, 2014 SIGNED: Jim Clancy, PZC Chairman W ca n Staff Report - Minor PUD Amendment January 7, 2014 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting AV U N Report date January 2, 2014 Project type Minor PUD Amendment Legal description Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning Planned Unit Development (PUD) Address 5684 & 5678 Wildridge Road East Prepared By Matt Pielsticker, Planning Manager Introduction Dominic Mauriello, the Applicant, representing John Minervini and Virginia Klyce, the Owners, is requesting a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment (the Application) to modify the allowed building type for two lots, Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision (the Property). Currently, three (3) dwelling units in the form of a single-family structure and duplex structure are permitted by right. The Application requesting the ability to develop the Property with three (3) single-family structures, and is being processed as a Minor PUD Amendment. The Application was heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) at their November 5, 2013 meeting; continued to November 19, 2013; continued to December 3, 2013; and continued to January 7, 2014 in order to work further with the neighboring property owners. Additional modifications were made to the Application (Attachment B, dated December 31, 2013) for PZC consideration. Attached to this report is a Vicinity Map (Attachment A), the revised Application (Attachment B), Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Comments and Applicant Response (Attachment C), and draft Findings of Fact and Recommendations to the Town Council (Attachment D). Application Process 07A6.02o, AMC) Minor PUD Amendment Process This Application is processed under §7.16.o6o(h), Amendments to a Final PUD, AMC. Subsection (1)(ii), sets forth criteria for a Minor Amendment, while subsection (2)(ii) sets forth the review procedures for the same process. The Amendments to a Final PUD section was recently adopted by the Town Council to provide clarity to review processes for Administrative and Minor PUD amendments. The Application meets the criteria for a Minor Amendment and is processed as such. A ency Referrals Pursuant to AMC §7.16.020(c)(2), Staff referred the Application to the Eagle County Planning Department, Eagle River Water and Sanitation District, and the Eagle River Fire Protection District for Comments. Staff has received comments from the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (Attachment C). These comments are related to the future subdivision process and building permit process and will be discussed during the staff analysis section. January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 1 1 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision I Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING Public Notification In order to comply with the Public Hearing and pertinent noticing requirements, a mailed notice was provided to all property owners within 300' of the property. The list of adjacent property owners is included within the Application. Additionally, a notice was published in the Vail Daily newspaper on Saturday, October 26t", 2013. Due to the date of the newspaper notifications and its lack of compliance with code requirements, the PZC held a public hearing on November 5th, but could not act on the application. The published notice also included notice of the additional public hearing on November Sgt", 2013. Since that meeting the PZC have conducted public hearings and continued the public hearing forward. Public Hearings The required public hearing requirements with PZC have been fulfilled and their recommendation will go to Council. The Council will make the final decision on this Application through a Resolution after holding an additional public hearing. Proposed PUD Amendment The Property is zoned PUD and is included in the Wildridge Subdivision. Included in the Wildridge Subdivision and PUD Plat is a Land Use Summary table, which breaks down the number of units for each individual lot, and also summarizes the type of construction permitted on each property. Below (Exhibit i) is an excerpt from the Wildridge PUD, with the pertinent Property information highlighted in yellow. The Property is entitled three (3) units in the form of one (1) single-family structure (Lot 15) and one (1) duplex structure (Lot 16). Exhibit i - Wildridge Subdivision and PUD Land Use Summary January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 1 2 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING IaF1L� U:4G norm } WT 1 11) UNITS LU.T 1.46 11lurs 6ACm LOT 2 9 KNITS LOT 4I 1 Lrmir LAT 7, 4 4 UNIT P_AC9a LILT 0-19 2 UMTS WIN L.OT 5—#a Fmfrs EACH LOT 60 L LIMIT CKIT 9-L1 4 LRA IT9 F.AI:H LOT 51-71 2 IINTT'R EAIM LIT 12 2LIMI F9 CPT Il DF.1.F*F.@ §U3tK A I:PT 14 DF.I.F.IFO Lor C -II 2 IIM1rF eArH I11T IS 11 LIMITS u4'i L2 L IIIITT I: fIT 1# 5 LINTTR 1r;Ir L3. 14 2 I11911-5 F.AEJ.j LAI? 17-1.A i MITI TACH LOT 11 1 NIT j LAT 140 — t LNTTS EACH L.I1T 18-20 2 UNITS FACH I LOT 7* & UNIT .9 IAT 2 '-_ VELIT" 77 4 LIN175 LfJT ]1—L6 2 U0119 BACK :AFT 1AIT 111;.79 6 LIMITS EACH IAT 34 4 UMTTRf7. N'ri:F TS m,, IAT Hfl-A9 4 LIM ITF EACH LOT 110 �. AL 2 rJN [79 RAL:N IAT 9ST*LHS§ 2 LN ITS FAGH LSIr 4x, 3 4 LIN r79 F. kc IAIT IIII -1 r17 4 SIX ITh TACH CAT 1,4-14 t UNT85 EACH IAIT Iril-IIH 2 LIN 114 V.ACK 1.07 ,5 3 IJ.NTT9 ,AIT I L I 1 1111,79 LOT %6 -fa 1 1 UIITT9 CACTI Urr 111-116 1. UNIT EWH Lr1T /e4 4 LTHIr5 LOT +4S-.RR7 IYNIT9 EA1:H 0101"111 2 I.rrr Aq. 9R 3 LTLIT79 EH 121 i inrmi P.ACH I.11T 41 UT[;FT1S[I 1.11'!' 4=12 T LIX1T4 TACH 1.1IT 17 4 1!NIT1, 1.In 14 � TIN 179 LrTT 1— #UNIT$ 1:IVT L5 2 LIN[Ti P.AER LOT 2 (PIR b 014M BAA'H 1.1 VT 17 -LN 4 TIN t7R PAC IL LOT )e5 1 LINTTR RACR 1.Isr 1421 2 TIN TTS F.AT.'9 LOT 4 3 13N[T5 1,7 11 4 11N rr' LI7T 7.1f) 10 UNT'4S EACH T..17 ]A-42 T LIN ITS'ACI{ Im 4 ® UNTTS I,rr 41-41 c 11XIT%. F.4CH, L#V LI 12 UNITS D. T 4f-56 2 IINr7K N.4v"K TRACT A ✓ F, TNETI M, P, ¢, E 4FFI9RFM11'*JLTkA1 NACF.?MC1L:.F'M9 7NA[:T N LIrMT "ININ-4C309. (4 APAWT-TF.M] 711 Arr I'pIF FAkK TRACT H OR I4AC..P., olCTW" mm ;TFlI. [TT January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 1 2 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING In 20oo, Lot 14 was replatted by the owners of Lots 13 and 15. The lot area of Lot 14 was split between each of the adjacent lots and its associated development rights were vacated. Lot 15 was replatted in zoos to remove the utility and drainage easement that had remained from Lot 14 when it was separated. This resulted in the current lot areas and layouts that the application is predicated upon. The Application (Attachment B) includes a narrative, response to the mandatory review criteria, and preliminary site plans depicting potential lot layouts. This Application would create a new PUD, Minervini PUD, which would create three (3) separate lots of record that each are permitted one (1) single-family structure. The Application proposes to keep standard Wildridge easements (ten (1o) foot front/rear yard and seven and one-half (7.5) foot side yard) and setbacks (twenty-five (25) foot front setback and ten (1o) foot side and rear setback), but proposes modifying other standards. The building height is proposed to remain at thirty-five (35) feet for Lot z, but be reduced to twenty-eight (28) feet for Lot 1 and Lot 3. The Application proposes to limit the curb cuts for driveways to two (2) for the three (3) lots and proposed to plat non -developable areas. Based on input received from the neighboring owners, the Applicant has decreased the maximum building footprint to two thousand (2,000) square feet for lots 1 and 3 and four thousand feet (4,000) for lot 2. In addition, the Application now proposes building square footage maximums for lots 1 & 3 of four thousand (4,000) square feet of livable area. Background of Wildridge The original Wildridge "Specially Planned Area" (now considered a "PUD" by default) and the accompanying Subdivision plat were established with a specific purpose and intent: to offer a diverse range of housing types and options to serve a diverse local population. As such, the housing types in the Wildridge PUD are diverse: single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and other forms of multi -family structures - because the housing needs of the local population were, are, and continue to be diverse. It was not platted as a solely single-family home subdivision and PUD for a reason: Avon's local population is not homogenous. Over the years there have been amendments wherein development rights have been altered and replatted through the PUD and Subdivision process. The most recent amendment was for the "June Creek Corner" PUD in Block 2 of the Wildridge Subdivision, where a fourplex lot was converted into two (2) duplex structures. Another recent example was the "Wildridge Point PUD" in Block 4 of the Wildridge Subdivision, where two (2) duplex properties were replatted and converted into three (3) single-family lots. This application was approved with building footprint limitations, or de facto building envelopes, of 2,500 sq. ft. and 3,000 sq. ft. Another example in Wildridge was the Dry Creek PUD in Block 2, wherein a fourplex lot was converted to three (3) single-family residences. This individual PUD amendment was also January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 13 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING predicated on approval of a subdivision variance, and reduced the number of dwelling units by one (1), and limited the maximum building square footage for each lot. Staff Analysis Staff supports this amendment as it would result in a reduced impact on the neighboring properties, and allows for a flexible development pattern in the form of three (3) structures in place of two (i). The massing is improved with more opportunity for building articulation and the introduction of light and air between units which is ensured through the provisions for building footprint maximums and non -developable areas. After reviewing the PUD review criteria below, Staff finds the Application in conformance with the purpose of the Development Code, review criteria, and there appears to be no added impact to neighboring properties. The development pattern in this portion of Wildridge is mainly duplexes with some sporadic single-family structures, the proposed application will help provide variety in the building for and create a more diverse development pattern. PUD Review Criteria Pursuant to §7.16.o6o(e)(4), Review Criteria, AMC, the PZC shall consider a number of review criteria when evaluating the Application. The following criteria must be considered when forming the basis of a recommendation: (i) The PUD addresses a unique situation, confers a substantial benefit to the Town, and/or incorporates creative site design such that it achieves the purposes of this Development Code and represents an improvement in quality over what could have been accomplished through strict application of the otherwise applicable district or development standards. Such improvements in quality may include, but are not limited to: improvements in open space provision and access; environmental protection; tree/vegetation preservation; efficient provision of streets, roads, and other utilities and services; or increased choice of living and housing environments. Staff Response: The stated purposes of §7.04, Development Code, AMC, and §7.16.o6o, PUD, AMC, includes statements regarding the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan; regulating intensity of use; avoiding increased demands on public services and facilities; and providing for compatibility with the surrounding area, among other statements. The proposed amendment does not increase demands on public services, and provides compatible building layouts with the surrounding area. The application does not increase the number of driveway curb cuts to three (3), which is permitted with the proposed development pattern, and instead limits the development to two (2) cuts, which is permitted with the current development pattern. This is a benefit to the immediate neighborhood as there is no net increase in the number of curb cuts. In addition, the inclusion of platted non -developable areas, additional setbacks, building footprint limitations, lower building heights, and livable area caps ensure the benefit of increased light and air between units is realized, thus resulting in an improved quality over what is permitted today. January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 14 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision I Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING (ii) The PUD rezoning will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare; Staff Response: The Application does not negatively affect the public health, safety and welfare. The inclusion of single-family structures on the Property is compatible with the adjacent single-family and duplex residential uses. (iii) The PUD rezoning is consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan, the purposes of this Development Code, and the eligibility criteria outlined in §7.i6.o6o(b); Staff Response: The proposed PUD amendment is part of an established PUD, and is therefore not subject to the eligibility criteria or Public Benefit requirements outlined in §7.16.o6o(b). Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan is required and analysis is provided below. The Comprehensive Plan includes this property within District 24: Wildridge Residential District. The planning principals specific to this property include the following: • Redesign the intersection of Metcalf and Nottingham Roads, and implement the other recommendations for District 4 to enhance the entry to Wildridge and provide more direct access from the Town Center to Wildridge. • Construct bicycle lanes along Metcalf and Wildridge Roads. • Promote a trail system through open space areas in Wildridge to provide alternatives to the roadways for pedestrian circulation and greater connection to the surrounding open space. • Preserve and enhance the existing open space trails and explore the possibility of developing additional parcels into pocket parks. • Acquire and maintain as public open space the U.S. Forest Service -owned parcel adjacent to Wildridge that includes Beaver Creek Point. • Add an alternative or second access route to Wildridge (perhaps forest service road during the spring and summer). • Identify and delineate all open space parcels and public trails. • Site buildings of varying sizes along the street to maximize sun exposure, protect views, be compatible with existing surrounding development, and break up building bulk. Clearly, the majority of the planning principles for the Wildridge District deal more with enhancing open space and non -motorized access options. Except for the last planning principle, these do not relate to the Application. Regarding the last principle, this PUD Amendment allows for greater flexibility in building sizes, breaks up the building bulk and January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 15 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision I Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING has the potential to maximize sun exposure over what could be experienced with the underlying and existing zoning. (iv) Facilities and services (including roads and transportation, water, gas, electric, police and fire protection, and sewage and waste disposal, as applicable) will be available to serve the subject property while maintaining adequate levels of service to existing development; Staff Response: The PUD amendment has no incremental impact on public facilities or services; therefore, the existing services can adequately serve the property. Eagle River Water and Sanitation District has provided comments on the Application including: concerns regarding the allowed uses within the non -developable areas; the need for drainage and utility easements; and the verification of water taps and sewer service tie- ins. The applicant has responded (Attachment C) that these comments would best be addressed during the platting and building permit portions of this project. The Applicant did agree that the non -developable areas will allow for utilities and access to those utilities and that all new lot line easements will be utility and drainage easements. Staff agrees with the Applicant that these items should be addressed during the platting process and does believe the other comments are best addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit as is required by Town Code. (v) Compared to the underlying zoning, the PUD rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment, including air, water, noise, storm water management, wildlife, and vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated; Staff Response: No adverse impacts upon the natural environment, wildlife, vegetation, air, or stormwater management are anticipated. (vi) Compared to the underlying zoning, the PUD rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts upon other property in the vicinity of the subject tract; and Staff Response: As discussed herein, the approval of the PUD amendment would not result in significant adverse impacts upon other property in the vicinity. As discussed by the applicant, the existing development pattern could see "coast to coast" development on each of the subject lots. The proposed PUD Amendment includes additional setbacks, easements, and non -developable areas which provide for undevelopable areas resulting in a development pattern of three (3) separate buildings which could result in reduced impacts to other properties in the area, by providing additional building separation. In addition, the reduced building height for Lots 1 and 3 to twenty-eight (28) feet will result in a direct reduced impact on adjacent properties particularly those to the north. The commitment to building footprint maximums and square footage has the potential to reduce impacts on adjacent properties by providing assurances to those properties of the maximum size potential of structures on these lots. January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 16 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING (vii) Future uses on the subject tract will be compatible in scale with uses or potential future uses on other properties in the vicinity of the subject tract. Staff Response: As proposed, the Application will either increase the compatibility with uses or potential future uses on other properties in the vicinity, or will result in no change to uses as currently exist. Staff Recommendation PZC should conduct a public hearing, consider additional public comments, and approve or amend the draft Findings of Fact, Record of Decision, and Recommendation (Attachment D) accordingly. Attachments A: Vicinity Map B: Application C: ERWSD Comment Letter and Applicant Response D: Draft Findings of Fact and Recommendation to Town Council January 7, 2014 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 17 Lots 15 & 16, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision / Minor PUD Amendment - PUBLIC HEARING Vicinity Map - Lot 15 & 16, Block 4, WR Attachment A This..p—a producedbyMeC.—mu ityDevelopmentDep.l.ent. Ueeoffhi—p Feet shouldbeforgeneralpwpos—Iy. TownofAvondoesnof—ntthe Property Boundaries accuracy of the data contained herein. Created by C --fly Development Department Is 120 240 Attachment B u Mauriello Planning Group December 31, 2013 Matt Pielsticker, AICP Senior Planner Town of Avon Re: Minervini PUD Amendment Resubmitta Dear Matt: Attached with this cover letter is an updated submittal for the Minervini Minor PUD Amendment. The updated submittal reflects changes made to the application based on comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as input we have received from the neighbors. Over the course of the two previous hearings and after meeting with the neighbors in December, the application has been updated with the following limitations: • Lot 1 is limited to a 3,000 sq. ft. building footprint, 4,000 sq. ft. of livable floor area, 28' height limitation, and a nondevelopment zone of approximately 0.061 acres; • Lot 2 (the existing home) is limited to a 4,000 sq. ft. building footprint, 28' height limitation, and a nondevelopment zone of approximately 0.282 acres; and Lot 3 is limited to a 2,000 sq. ft. building footprint, 4,000 sq. ft. of livable floor area, 28' height limitation, and a nondevelopment zone of approximately 0.027 acres. The applicant believes that the revised proposal addresses the primary concerns of the neighbors and results in a beneficial development patterns for the property. The precedent for this type of application was previously set by the Town Council with its recent amendments to the Development Code and recent allowing for this type of application to be considered. The attributes and circumstances of these properties are unique given the platting history, the size of the existing lots, the topography of the properties, and development pattern in the vicinity. The applicant believes the proposal is reasonable and appropriate. Sincerely, Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP Attachment B PUD Amendment 5684 and 5678 Wildridge Road East Lots 15 and 16, Block 4,Wildridge Subdivision u a kCI Mauriello Planning Group Submitted: September 30, 2013 Revised November 12, 2013 Revised December 31, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS A. Introduction 3 B. Background 5 C. Precedent and Other Similar Applications 9 D. Zoning Analysis I I E. Proposed Lot Layout & Development Comparisons 12 F. Criteria for Review 14 G. Adjacent Addresses (within 300 Feet) 21 H. Appendices 22 I. Conceptual Lot Layout 2. 1981 Wildridge Final Plat 3. 2000 Lot 13, 14, and 15 Replat 4. 2005 Final Plat of Lot 15 Attachment B 2 Attachment B A. INTRODUCTION The applicants, John Minervini and Virginia Klyce, represented by Mauriello Planning Group, are requesting a Minor PUD Amendment for Lots 15 (5684 Wildridge Road East) and 16 (5678 Wildridge Road East), Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. The Wildridge PUD currently in effect, identifies Lot 15 as one single-family lot and Lot 16 as one duplex lot, allowing for a total of 3 dwelling units, in the form of I single-family and I duplex on the property (see background for more detail in this regard). The applicant is requesting to create 3 lots, each single-family lots, maintaining the ability to construct a total of 3 dwelling units on the property as single-family homes. Because the lots are located within the Wildridge PUD, a minor amendment to the PUD is required. If approved, a minor subdivision application will be submitted for approval (the development code was recently amended allow minor subdivisions to be approved administratively), which will implement the PUD amendment. The lot lines, lot sizes, and other provisions typical to a subdivision are shown within this application. Below is a conceptual design of the lot layout and home footprint locations: LOT 1 .351 ACRES (15,201 SQ FT) LOT 3 .35 ACRES (15,251 SQ FT) �- o� LOT 2 :E s "LOT 2 • �+ ��- 804 ACRES s 106 SQ FT( !� LOT 19 - LOT 1 - NON DEVELOPMENT EASEMENT - .046 ACRES PROPOSED LOTS CONCEPTUAL HOME LAYOUT • T TPACT < LOT 3 - NON DEVELOPMENT EASEMENT - .027 ACRES LOT 21 NON DEVELOPMENT JT - .282 ACRES LOT 1 92.20' STREET FRONTAGE LOT 2 - 95.26' STREET FRONTAGE LOT 3 - 45' STREET FRONTAGE The intent is to create the ability to construct two small single-family residences in addition to the existing home. There is no change in allowable density for the property thus allowing it to be classified as a minor PUD amendment. The goal is to construct smaller, more livable units with the living areas primarily on the main floor. This is a product lacking in the Town of Avon and within the Wildridge neighborhood. Steep slopes and duplex development tend to unite to create the need for more vertical units, which do not necessarily appeal to a buyer looking to 3 Attachment B downsize and eliminate stairs as they age. To ensure this type of more compact development, the applicant is proposing a building footprint limitation on all of the lots, a limit on residential square footage for Lots I and 3, and a height limitation on Lots I and 3. No similar restrictions exist on these lots today and will therefore serve as a benefit to the neighboring properties and have less impacts than what might be developed under the current development standards. Finally, the total number of curb cuts for the three lots will remain at only two, thus eliminating any concerns with additional traffic conflicts generated by providing additional access points to Wildridge Road. This will also allow for a design which will move the existing curb cut at 5684 Wildridge Road, creating an area to landscape and berm, thus screening the garage doors from the street. The Minervini Family intends to live in one of the new homes as they become empty -nesters. They would like to downsize and ensure that the new home allows them to age in place rather than leave the community to pursue a type and size of housing product that is not common in the Town of Avon. A home with a small footprint and the majority of living space on the main floor will allow them to remain in Wildridge for years to come. Their intent is to sell the existing home and the third proposed home. Photo of Lot 15 (left) and Lot 16 (right) in June 2013 Northern portion of Lot 15 for newly created Lot 4 Attachment B B. BACKGROUND The Town of Avon was incorporated in 1978 and Benchmark Properties created the Wildridge and Wildwood Subdivisions shortly thereafter. On this original plat, Lot 15 and Lot 16 were each identified as permitted "2 units each." Subsequently, the Wildridge Subdivision was completely replatted in 1981. Lots 15 and 16 remained in the same configuration, but on the 1981 plat, Lot 15 was identified as permitted only" I unit" while Lot 16 was still permitted 2 units. Lot 15 was platted as 0.75 acres/32,670 sq. ft., while Lot 16 was platted as 0.42 acres / 18,295 sq. ft., as indicated on a portion of the 1981 plat provided below: In 2000, Lot 14 was replatted by the then -owners of Lots 13 and 15 and the lot area of Lot 14 was split between the two properties. This replat was done as part of a PUD amendment which vacated Lot 14 and the development rights associated with Lot 14, while according to the application, the "Development rights of Lots 13 and 15 were to remain unchanged." Lot 14 was originally permitted 2 units. It is unclear if at the time of this approval, it was understood by the Town and the applicant that Lot 15 was permitted only I unit. The staff memorandum for the adopting ordinance clearly states that Lot 15 would be still be permitted 2 units as indicated on the memo from the file provided on the following page, a statement that we know now was in error: 5 Memo To: Honorable Mayor and Town Council Thru: Bill Efting, Town Manager From: George H. Harrison, Planner Date: March 18,1999 Re: First Reading of Ordinance 99-07, A Ordinance Amending the Wildridge Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Lots 13, 14, and 15, Bloch 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Town Of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado. Summ t 14 was recently purchased jointly by the owners of Lots 13 and 15. They intend to the Wildridge PUD in order to split Lot 14 and incorporate the adjoining halves into current properties. Lot 14's development rights would be vacated leaving both Lots 13 .5's two -unit designation unchanged. Discussion: The PUD amendment proposes only one deviation from the existing Wildridge PUD development standards to allow a partially constructed keystone block retaining wall on Lot 13 to exceed 4 feet in height within the front yard setback. This wall Js on the uphill side of the driveway retaining the larger hillside above. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Town Council pass Ordinance 99-07, amending the Wildridge PUD for Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Alternatives: 1. Approve 2. Approve with conditions 3. Deny the applications in whole or in part Proposed Motion: "I move to approve on first reading Ordinance No. 99-07, approving an amendment to the Wildridge PUD for Lots 13, 14, and 15, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado." Attachment B 6 Attachment B The plat below shows how Lot 14 was divided and added into the lot area of Lot 13 and 15. This increased the size of Lot 15 to 1.085 acres while its designation on the 1981 plat was for only 0.75 acres. FINAI A RESUBDIVISION OF LOTS WILL TOWN OF AVON, EAG Lot 15 as replatted in 2000 LOT 13 ACRES acs .... O B6 IQ 4 ``r y _ - _a -wax• f'� 6• DoT 15 ) 085 ACRES .ar.r. ------ Finally, in 2005, the then -owners of Lot 15 eliminated the utility and drainage easement running through the lot and replatted Lot 15 into its current configuration at 1.085 acres as shown below. r»•zn.• .o.ro Anhibeque Land Consul I_ - hdmioiul L.nA �urceylnRt 7 Attachment B To summarize the history of these properties, Lot 16 was always permitted 2 dwelling units in the form of a duplex. Lot 15 was originally a smaller lot, and permitted only I dwelling unit. However, there was a Lot 14 which was originally permitted 2 dwelling units in the form of a duplex, half of which was incorporated into Lot 15. So one could conclude that from the 1981 plat of the Wildridge Subdivision, that the combined area of subject property would have supported 4 dwelling units. From the originally intended 4 dwelling units, the Minervini Family wants to build only 3 dwelling units. The proposed lot layout is provided below: SUI D SE BACK a i DRAINAGE EASEMENT ) I 1 f Di 19 ) I PROPOSED LOT LAYOUT fRAcr K LOT 3 - NON DEVELOPMENT EASEMENT - .027 ACRES BUILDING SETBACK DRAINAGE EASEMENT NON DEVELOPMENT VT - .282 ACRES BUILDING SETBACK LINAGE EASEMENT Attachment B C. PRECEDENT AND OTHER SIMILAR APPLICATIONS Similar projects have been approved by the Town of Avon in the past. For example, the following plat shows a resubdivision of Lot 10 and 1 I, Block 2,Wildridge approved by the Town of Avon in 2002. This plat took 2 existing duplex lots and re -platted them as 3 single-family lots. FINAL "LAT A RESUBDMSION OF LOT 10 "J AND LOT 11, BLOCK 2, WILDRIDGE - - Town of Avon, County of Engle. State of Colorado -- . —� '—"'••'^'— Y-1(yi fC)wc♦ trona srAM IroRrxsr M��dpp,fO~f��D ���D b4L m 4 A 4u =41t6ru In 2005, the Western Sage PUD allowed for 3 triplex lots and I duplex lot to be re -platted into 8 single-family homes. FTW11. cur WESTERN SAGE DEVELOPMENT A RMHEI PISION OF LOTS 54. 55. 89, k 90. RIMX I. WIIDRIDGL 10- of •l01. —1.. 1011n. cm0Ra00 The Dry Creek PUD, approved in 2006, was another similar approval by the Town of Avon. The 9 Attachment B Dry Creek PUD allowed for Lot 44 which was permitted 4 units to be re -platted into 3 single- family lots. Most recently, the Wildridge Point Subdivision and PUD Amendment was approved by the Town of Avon in 2013. Wildridge Point allowed for Lots 33 and 34, each duplex lots, to be replatted as 3 single-family lots. While these examples were processed in different ways (PUD within a PUD, amendment to a PUD, etc.) the recently adopted Avon Development Code provides a clear process for minor amendments to an existing PUD, simplifying the approval process for applications such as these. 10 Attachment B D. ZONING ANALYSIS Current: Standard Lot IS Lot 16 Total Lot Size (acres) 1.085 0.42 1.505 Units Allowed 1.00 2.00 3.00 Density (du/acre) 0.92 4.76 1.99 Lot Frontage 118.43 114.03 232.46 Proposed: Standard Lot I Lot 2 Lot 3 Total Lot Size (acres) 0.351 0.804 0.35 1.505 Units Allowed 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 Density (du/acre) 2.85 1.24 2.86 1.99 Lot Frontage 92.20 95.26 45.00 232.46 There are no changes to any other standards of the Wildridge PUD, with setbacks remaining as outlined on the plat. Front setbacks are 25 ft. while side and rear setbacks are 10 ft. The maximum height limitation is 35 ft. However, the applicant is proposing the following limitations to Lots 1, 2, and 3: Height: 35 ft. on Lot 2 , and 28 ft. on Lot I and Lot 3 Building Footprint: 3,000 sq. ft. on Lot 1, 4,000 sq. ft. on Lot 2, and 2,000 sq. ft. on Lot 3 Curb Cuts/Access: No more than 2 curb cuts to Wildridge Road East for the entirety of Lots 1, 2, and 3. Non -Development Zone: proposed on all lots (to be shown on the plat). Lot I will indicate a non -development easement of approximately 0.061 acres. Lot 2 will indicate a non -development easement of approximately 0.282 acres. Finally, Lot 3 will indicate a non -development easement of approximately 0.027 acres. Limitation on Residential Square Footage: No more than 4,000 sq. ft. of livable area on Lots I and 3, exclusive of garage area, crawl space, or attic space. iE Attachment B E. PROPOSED LOT LAYOUT & DEVELOPMENT COMPARISONS Below is the proposed lot layout and development scenario reflecting the proposed limitations as well as a development scenario that could be implemented on the property today with existing PUD development standards. With the proposed lot sizes, no development zones, and building footprint restrictions, the maximum building footprint of the entire property is limited to 9,000 sq. ft. Today, the home on Lot 15 could be redeveloped or expanded and a new duplex could be developed on Lot 16. Based on the configuration and setbacks on Lot 16, it could be developed with a 9,300 sq. ft. building footprint (4,650 sq. ft. per unit) and at three -stories that would equal 27,900 sq. ft. of total floor area including garage area for two units. A more reasonably developed duplex on Lot 16 might be a 7,000 sq. ft. footprint and with a total floor area including garages of 12,000 sq. ft. (6,000 sq. ft. per unit). Given the large size of Lot 15 after the 2000 replat, Lot 15 could support a building footprint of 18,000 sq. ft. or 36,000 sq. ft. of total floor area. Such home might not be reasonable given the market. Using the Farr residence as a guide, this lot might be more reasonably developed with a 9,000 sq. ft. footprint and total floor area of 14,000 sq. ft. including garage area. As proposed the total footprint area would be limited to 9,000 sq. ft. versus 16,000 sq. ft. and the total floor area would likely be limited to 14,000 sq. ft in three homes versus 26,000 sq. ft. in three units. F,f LOT 1 .351 ACRES (15.201 SQ FT) - - PROPOSED LOTS CONCEPTUAL HOME LAYOUT -LOT 3 - NON DEVELOPMENT / EASEMENT • .027 ACRES NON DEVELOPMENT 4T - .282 ACRES 92.20' STREET FRONTAGE 95.26' STREET FRONTAGE 45' STREET FRONTAGE 12 Attachment B CONCEPTUAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT FOR EXISTING LOTS 13 Attachment B F. CRITERIA FOR REVIEW Section 7.16.060.4 establishes the criteria for review of a PUD amendment. It is important to note that these are the same criteria as provided for the establishment of a new PUD, so many are not applicable to an amendment of this limited magnitude. Section 7.16.060.4 states: Review Criteria. The PZC and Town Council shall consider the following criteria as the basis for a recommendation or decision to rezone a property to PUD Overlay, and approve a preliminary PUD plan, or process a PUD amendment: (i) The PUD addresses a unique situation, confers a substantial benefit to the Town, and/or incorporates creative site design such that it achieves the purposes of this Development Code and represents an improvement in quality over what could have been accomplished through strict application of the otherwise applicable district or development standards. Such improvements in quality may include, but are not limited to: improvements in open space provision and access; environmental protection; tree/vegetation preservation; efficient provision of streets, roads, and other utilities and services; or increased choice of living and housing environments. Applicant Response: The proposed amendment to the Wildridge PUD to allow for 3 single family lots allows for a creative site design that is an improvement over the existing lot configuration. The proposal creates building footprint limitations (which do not exist today) which allows for greater open space and environmental protection. These footprint limitations, along with a proposed height limitation, create an increase in choice of living and housing environments. These proposed units are smaller, livable units, intended to be a more accessible choice for potential buyers. (ii) The PUD rezoning will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare; Applicant Response: The proposal includes the limitation of 2 curb cuts for the 3 proposed lots as would exist today, minimizing the effects to the traffic circulation on Wildridge Road. This also allows for additional landscaping and berming at the existing curb cut, screening the garage doors from direct public view. Because there is no increase in the number of proposed dwelling units, there is no increase in the estimated number of trips generated by the project. As a result, the proposal promotes the public health, safety, and welfare. (iii)The PUD rezoning is consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan, the purposes of this Development Code, and the eligibility criteria outlined in §7.16.060(b),- Applicant 7.16.060(b);Applicant Response: The Avon Land Use Map indicates the property as Residential - Low Density as indicated on the map below: 14 I[j Civic/Public - Regional commercial - Mixed use Neighborhood commercial Light industrial commercial Open space k + Park Residential - high density Residential - medium density Residential - low density Town of Avon boundary Parcel Water Attachment B The Comprehensive Plan defines "Residential -Lot Density" as follows: Areas designated for residential low density are intended to provide sites for single-family, duplex, and multi -family dwellings at a density no greater than 7.5 dwelling units per acre. The proposal complies with the density as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the Development Code is provided in Section 7.04.030 Purposes of the Avon Development Code: The Development Code is intended to promote and achieve the following goals and purposes for the Avon community, including the residents, property owners, business owners and visitors: (a) Divide the Town into zones, restricting and requiring therein the location, erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration and use of buildings, structures and land for trade, industry, residence and other specified uses; regulate the intensity of the use of lot areas; regulate and determine the area of open spaces surrounding such buildings; establish building lines and locations of buildings designed for specified industrial, commercial, residential and other uses within such areas; establish standards to which buildings or structures shall conform; establish standards for use of areas adjoining such buildings or structures; (b) Implement the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other applicable planning documents of the Town; (c) Comply with the purposes stated in state and federal regulations which authorize the regulations in this Development Code; (d) Avoid undue traffic congestion and degradation of the level of service provided by streets and roadways, promote effective and economical mass transportation and enhance effective, attractive and economical pedestrian opportunities; (e) Promote adequate light, air, landscaping and open space and avoid undue concentration or sprawl of population; 15 Attachment B (f) Provide a planned and orderly use of land, protection of the environment and preservation of viability, all to conserve the value of the investments of the people of the Avon community and encourage a high quality of life and the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality, (g) Prevent the inefficient use of land; avoid increased demands on public services and facilities which exceed capacity or degrade the level of service for existing residents; provide for phased development of government services and facilities which maximizes efficiency and optimizes costs to taxpayers and users; and promote sufficient, economical and high-quality provision of all public services and public facilities, including but not limited to water, sewage, schools, libraries, police, parks, recreation, open space and medical facilities; (h) Minimize the risk of damage and injury to people, structures and public infrastructure created by wild fire, avalanche, unstable slopes, rock fall, mudslides, flood danger and other natural hazards; (i) Achieve or exceed federal clean air standards; (j) Sustain water sources by maintaining the natural watershed, preventing accelerated erosion, reducing runoff and consequent sedimentation, eliminating pollutants introduced directly into streams and enhancing public access to recreational water sources; (k) Maintain the natural scenic beauty of the Eagle River Valley in order to preserve areas of historical and archaeological importance, provide for adequate open spaces, preserve scenic views, provide recreational opportunities, sustain the tourist -based economy and preserve property values; (1) Promote architectural design which is compatible, functional, practical and complimentary to Avon's sub -alpine environment, (m) Achieve innovation and advancement in design of the built environment to improve efficiency, reduce energy consumption, reduce emission of pollutants, reduce consumption of non-renewable natural resources and attain sustainability; (n) Achieve a diverse range of attainable housing which meets the housing needs created by jobs in the Town, provides a range of housing types and price points to serve a complete range of life stages and promotes a balanced, diverse and stable full time residential community which is balanced with the visitor economy, (o) Promote quality real estate investments which conserve property values by disclosing risks, taxes and fees; by incorporating practical and comprehensible legal arrangements; and by promoting accuracy in investment expectations; and (p) Promote the health, safety and welfare of the Avon community. As demonstrated within this document, the proposal is consistent with and in substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code by not increasing the number of dwelling units, providing for greater open space and reducing building footprints within an existing subdivision. The eligibility criteria for a PUD are outlined in Section 7.16.060(b) and state the following: (1) Property Eligible. All properties within the Town of Avon are eligible to apply for PUD approval. (2) Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan. (3) Consistent with PUD Intent. The proposed development shall be consistent with the intent and spirit of the PUD purpose statement in §7.16.060(a). (4) Compatibility with Existing Uses. The proposed development shall not impede the continued use or development of surrounding properties for uses that are permitted in the Development Code or planned for in the Avon Comprehensive Plan. 16 Attachment B (S) Public Benefit. A recognizable and material benefit will be realized by both the future residents and the Town as a whole through the establishment of a PUD, where such benefit would otherwise be infeasible or unlikely. (6) Preservation of Site Features. Long-term conservation of natural, historical, architectural, or other significant features or open space will be achieved, where such features would otherwise be destroyed or degraded by development as permitted by the underlying zoning district. (7) Sufficient Land Area for Proposed Uses. Sufficient land area has been provided to comply with all applicable regulations of the Development Code, to adequately serve the needs of all permitted uses in the PUD projects, and to ensure compatibility between uses and the surrounding neighborhood. As demonstrated within this document, the proposal is consistent with the eligibility criteria for a PUD. The proposal is consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan and compatible with existing uses, which are of a similar density as the proposal. There is a demonstrated public benefit by providing limitations on building footprints, height, and the number of curb cuts, where no such limitation exists today. Areas of steeper slopes are preserved, and the appearance and amount of open space is increased. (iv)Facilities and services (including roads and transportation, water, gas, electric, police and fire protection, and sewage and waste disposal, as applicable) will be available to serve the subject property while maintaining adequate levels of service to existing development; Applicant Response: Because there is no increase in density for the proposed project, all facilities and services are available and adequate to serve the development. (v) Compared to the underlying zoning, the PUD rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts upon the natural environment, including air, water, noise, storm water management, wildlife, and vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated; Applicant Response: The proposal is entirely located within a previously platted subdivision, with no increase in the allowable density, and as a result will not have any additional adverse impacts on the above -reference criteria. (vi)Compared to the underlying zoning, the PUD rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse impacts upon other property in the vicinity of the subject tract; and Applicant Response: As there is no increase in allowable density for the properties, there is no increase to impacts upon other property in the vicinity. The proposal is consistent with the allowable density for surrounding properties and will be smaller in scale than many of the existing homes in the neighborhood. The following photos provide some idea of the character of the existing homes in the vicinity: 17 Attachment B 4 Adjacent homes (Lots 21 and 20) behind Lot 15, accessed from Coyote Ridge from Coyote Ridge Duplex on Lot 77, located across Wildridge Road East Home on Lot 17, adjacent to Lot 16 The character of the neighborhood, while entirely residential, has homes that were built in different real estate boom and bust cycles. Some homes, generally built in the 1990s and early 2000s are large single-family or duplex units that stretch from lot line to lot line. Homes constructed earlier are smaller, with minimal footprints and significant development potential remaining. With the restrictions proposed by the Minervini Family on building footprints, height, residential square footage, and curb cuts, the neighbors in the vicinity are guaranteed smaller homes with less impact than what is currently allowed on the property. (vii)Future uses on the subject tract will be compatible in scale with uses or potential future uses on other properties in the vicinity of the subject tract. Applicant Response: While the neighborhood is generally developed with a mix of single-family homes and duplexes, the majority of the lots in the vicinity are allowed a minimum of 2 units. The following analysis provides a map which indicates the allowable land use for properties in the general vicinity. In addition to the map, an analysis has been provided which indicates the lot size for each property, the number of units allowed, and the density (dwelling units/acre) allowed for each lot. This analysis indicates that the proposal is consistent with the allowable development for properties in the neighborhood. 18 Attachment B Lot Lot Size (acres) Dwelling Units Allowed Density Allowed (du/acre) 11 0.95 2 2.105 12 0.96 2 2.083 13 1.847 2 1.083 15 1.085 1 0.922 16 0.42 2 4.762 17 0.398 2 5.025 18 0.453 2 4.415 19 0.47 2 4.255 20 0.64 2 3.125 21 0.76 2 2.632 22 1.14 2 1.754 23 1.4 2 1.429 24 1.61 2 1.242 25 0.95 2 2.105 26 1 2 2.000 27 1.2 2 1.667 28 1.169 2 1.711 75 0.49 2 4.082 76 0.55 2 3.636 77 1.07 2 1.869 78 0.723 2 2.766 79 0.61 2 3.279 80 0.586 2 3.413 81 0.51 2 3.922 82 1.33 2 1.504 83 0.96 2 2.083 Totall 23.281 1 51 2.191 Averagel 0.895 1 1.962 1 2.649 19 Attachment B As proposed, the allowable density for each lot is as follows: QLot 1: 1 du / .351 acres = 2.8 du/acre QLot 2: 1 du / .804 acres = 1.2 du/acre QLot 3: 1 du / .35 acres = 2.9 du/acre QTotal: 3 du / 1.505 acres = 1.99 du/acre (no change) As indicated in the analysis, this is consistent with the allowable density for properties in the neighborhood, which average 2.6 dwelling units per acre. 20 Attachment B G. ADJACENT ADDRESSES (within 300 Feet) MERLING, KAREN, JOSEPH, JEREMY & ELIZABETH In Care Of Name JEREMY MERLING 525 E I I TH ST APT 4A NEWYORK, NY 10009-5079 TOWN OF AVON PO BOX 975 AVON, CO 81620-0975 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PO BOX 25127 LAKEWOOD, CO 80225 NELSON, JOELY PO BOX 2214 VAIL, CO 81658 PEASE, DAVID L. & LISA M. PO BOX 4035 EDWARDS, CO 81632-4035 HANDELSMAN, HAROLD S. & CATHERINE 823 GREENLEAF GLENCOE, IL 60022 JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION 10790 RANCHO BERNARDO RD SAN DIEGO, CA 92127-5705 FARR, MIKE PO BOX 198 AVON, CO 81620 YOUNG, PATRICIAANN -WILEY,JAMES L. PO BOX 3388 AVON, CO 81620 SWEET, JOHN B. & CARLEEN H. PO BOX 2044 EDWARDS, CO 81632 BEETCH, KONR & SUZANNE G. PO BOX 929 EDWARDS, CO 81632 HUNKJACK D. PO BOX 1095 VAIL, CO 81658 NEALA. HEYBECK TRUST, NEALA. HEYBECK TRUSTEE - JINEANE B. HEYBECKTRUST, JINEANE B. HEYBECK TRUSTEE 415 E NORTH WATER ST APT 703 CHICAGO, IL 60611-5808 TAYLOR, ROBERT A. & ELIZABETH L. PO BOX 3910 CARMEL, IN 46072-3910 650E WILDRIDGE ROAD LLC 1067 N MASON RD STE 7 ST LOUIS, MO 63141 HAGEBAK, ROBERT W. PO BOX 4056 VAIL, CO 81658 WORRELL,ANGELA R.& ROBERT W PO BOX 2923 VAIL, CO 81658-2923 SUTTER, RYAN A. & TRISTA PO BOX 2470 AVON, CO 81620 VERLINDE, RAYMOND E. & LAURA LEE A. 10761 HUNTWICK ST HIGHLANDS RANCH, CO 80130 FRAGOLA, JAMES A. & KRISTA D. 5690 MERRY LN EXCELSIOR, MN 55331 BLUE SKY 3 LLC 18 WYNSTONE WY NORTH BARRINGTON, IL 60010 RISCHITELLI, HENRY J., JR 2820 PETERSON PL NORCROSS, GA 3007 1-1 803 JOE & CATHERINE ROSS REVOCABLE TRUST, JOSEPH G. & CATHERINE C. ROSS CO -TRUSTEES 3967 DOGWOOD CANYON LOOP FAYETTEVILLE,AR 72704-6120 MORGAN, JEFF & JODY PO BOX 207 VAIL, CO 81658-0207 SMITH,THOMAS RANDALL PO BOX 8471 AVON, CO 81620 KOCH, KIMBERLY A. & THOMAS PO BOX 3907 AVON, CO 81620-3907 CALLAWAY, CLIFFORD KAY &ALTHEATREVOR PO BOX 1290 AVON, CO 81620-1290 21 H. APPENDICES I. Conceptual Lot Layout 2. 1981 Wildridge Final Plat 3. 2000 Lot 13, 14, and 15 Replat 4. 2005 Final Plat of Lot 15 Attachment B 22 0' 20' 40' 60' P� / i i GUARD RAILS ��� 10 1 1 86;0 LOT 13 II g62o --- • 8 LOT 3 - - .35 ACRES _ (15,251 SQ FT) 1 L — 20' / LOT 1 351 ACRES y LOT 2 .804 ACRES (35,106 SQ FT) �!�BUILDING SETBACK •\�\\ (15 201 SQ FT \ ko'� DRAINAGE EASEMENT • Y--8590 1 ) g5gp ice\ �ry`L\ I A LOT 1 NON DEVELOPMENT •\ EASEMENT - .061 ACRES _OT 19 i LOT 17 9A\ • a. i 777—o" 4.5449" E 1 LOT 20 PROPOSED LOT LAYOUT TRACT K LOT 3 - NON DEVELOPMENT EASEMENT - .027 ACRES UILDING SETBACK 'DRAINAGE EASEMENT N i LOT 21 - NON DEVELOPMENT ENT - .282 ACRES UILDING SETBACK RAINAGE EASEMENT Attachment B M O N W m w H a W N 0' 20' 40' 60' LOT 1 .351 ACRES (15,201 SQ FT) 00 LOT 1 N , ...... LOT 17 PROPOSED LOTS CONCEPTUAL HOME LAYOUT LOT 13 ® � LOT 3 .35 ACRES- (15,251 SQ FT) -• • gF� LO 3 y LOT 2 �a EXISTING RESIDENCE �Nj i" LUT- 2 • ,$04 ACRES • J-0-6- SQ FT)• • • 5- • LOT 1 - NON DEVELOPMENT EASEMENT - .046 ACRES LOT 19 TRACT K no� SLOT 3 - NON DEVELOPMENT /EASEMENT - .027 ACRES LOT 21 UTT-2 - NON DEVELOPMENT ASEMENT - .282 ACRES _ • N 475449 E �1 r , r , r , r , LOT 20 92.20' STREET FRONTAGE it LOT 2 - 95.26' STREET FRONTAGE r LOT 3.- 45' STREET FRONTAGE 1 r r r Attachment B w �fV a Z O N D J w W o VD J Q C U 0 CoMMM l No _ M— M N N O H W JO w Z O�-- d N O x a r' � a 0 ► �-2 � CONCEPTUAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT FOR EXISTING LOTS OT 21 (1 GUARD RNL- `Z J Attachment B w M a M O N c' w Co w d w N Z O N D V) m J w W o V0 >J Q C U O J MMM Co lie No M N N O ~ W JO �Lr) wZ O�-- d N O x �w a r' 0 CL 0 Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment C From: Dominic Mauriello To: Jared Barnes Cc: Allison Kent Subject: Re: Minervini PUD Referral Date: Monday, October 28, 2013 8:50:08 AM Hi Jared: Thank you for forwarding that. Here is my response: • Once we prepare the final plat, we can ensure that the nondevelopment areas allow for utilities and access to utilities; • On the final plat, we will ensure that the easements are in fact drainage and utility easements; • We understand that there might not be existing taps/service to Lots 1 and 3; and • We understand that sewer service connections will have to tie into the existing system and that the nondevelopment areas will need to allow for this utility connection. Thanks, Dominic F. Mauriello, AICP Mauriello Planning Group, LLC PO Box 4777 2205 Eagle Ranch Road Eagle, Colorado 81631 970-376-3318 cell www.mpgvail.com On Oct 25, 2013, at 2:44 PM, Jared Barnes <jbarnes()avon.org> wrote: Dominic, Please see the comments from the ERWSD below. If you have any questions regarding the specific comments please feel free to contact myself and Tug. I would like to be copied on correspondence for File keeping records. Regards, Jared Barnes Planner II Community Development Town of Avon PO Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 970-748-4023 Attachment C From: Tug Birk [mai Ito: dbirk(aerwsd.org] Sent: Thursday, October 24, 2013 3:02 PM To: Jared Barnes Subject: RE: Minervini PUD Referral Jared, Here are the ERWSD comments. • SS MH CS1943-351MH0380 appears to be located within the proposed Lot 2 Non Development Easement. Ensure access/maintenance/easement requirements. • New side lot easements are called out as 'drainage easements' not 'drainage and utility easements' as previously contemplated in the Wildridge Subdivision. If the 'utility' portion of the easement is to be vacated we may need formal vacation. • Water tap/service stub outs will probably not be available for Lots 1 and 3; new taps will need to be connected at the water main in Wildridge Road East. • Verify that the proposed Lot 1 and Lot 3 will have adequate sewer service. Sewer services to these lots may require crossing the Lot 2 non -development easement for tie-in to the system. Thanks, Tug g Y-�-, Development Review Coordinator Eagle River Water and Sanitation District 970-477-5449 tbirk(@erwsd.org From: Jared Barnes [mailtoJbarnes(Davon.org] Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2013 3:35 PM To: Jared Barnes Subject: Minervini PUD Referral Hello, Attached is a request for referral comments on a PUD Amendment application being processed by the Town of Avon. The request is to amend the Wildridge PUD zoning for 2 lots to modify their allowed uses to permit 3 single family structures. The application will be accompanied by a subdivision application to create a new lot and there is no net gain or loss in dwelling units. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions you may have. Regards, AVON PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT, RECORD OF DECISION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Y O N I Ii l n It .. 1i ii CONCERNING THE MINOR PUD AMENDMENT FOR LOTS 15 & 16, BLOCK 4, WILDRIDGE SUBDIVISION The following findings of fact and recommendations are made in accordance with Avon Municipal Code ("AMC") §7.16.060(h), §7.16.020(g), & §7.16.060(e)(4): 1. Application Submitted. A Minor PUD Amendment Application ("the Application"), was submitted to the Community Development Department of the Town of Avon (the "Town") on October 7, 2013 by Dominic Mauriello (the "Applicant"). 2. Agency Referrals. On October 15, 2013, pursuant to AMC §7.16.020(c)(2), Staff referred the Application to outside review agencies, including the following: Eagle County Planning, Eagle River Water & Sanitation District, and Eagle River Fire Protection District. Comments were received from the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District and have been included in the recorded record of the Application. 3. Notice of Public Hearing. Pursuant to AMC §7.16.020(d), a notice of public hearing was published in The Vail Daily and a mailed notice was sent to all property owners within 300' of the properties. 4. Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC). Jared Barnes, Planner II, submitted Staff reports to the PZC dated November 1, 2013, and November 13, 2013. 5. Public Hearing before the PZC. On November 5, 2013, November 19, 2013, December 3, 2013, and January 7, 2014 the PZC held public hearings on the Application, and considered Staffs analysis, referral comments from the Eagle River Water & Sanitation District, and public comments received from neighboring property owners. 6. Compliance with Review Criteria. The PZC makes the following findings in regard to compliance with the applicable review criteria for a Minor PUD Amendment (§7.16.060(e)(4)) as the basis for this recommendation to Town Council: PZC FINDINGS: (1) The Application was processed in accordance with §7.16.060(h), Amendment to a Final PUD, which allowed the application to be processed as a minor amendment pursuant to §7.16.060(h)(1)(ii), Minor Amendment, and utilized the review criteria set forth in §7.16.060(e)(4), Preliminary PUD Review Criteria; and, FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION LOTS 15 & 16, BLOCK 4, WILRIDGE SUBDIVISION — MINERVINI MINOR PUD AMENDMENT Page 1 of 2 (2) The Application is in substantial compliance with §7.16.060(e)(4), Preliminary PUD Review Criteria, AMC; and, (3) The Application is not likely to result in adverse impacts upon the natural environment, including air, water, noise, storm water management, wildlife, and vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated with building footprint maximums; and, (4) Approval of the Application would reduce building massing compared to the existing underlying zoning, allowing for an improvement in quality over what could have been accomplished through the existing zoning designations; and, (5) Building impacts on-site are reduced by adding restrictions that are currently not in effect including: building footprint restrictions of 3,000 sq. ft. for proposed Lot 1, 4,000 sq. ft. for Lot 2, and 2,000 sq. ft. for Lot 3; additionally, livable square footage caps (not including garage space) of 4,000 sq. ft. for proposed Lots 1 & 3; reduced building height of twenty eight feet (28') for Lots 1 and 3; and, (6) The Application is in conformance Comprehensive Plan, including "siting maximize sun exposure, protect views, and break up building bulk." PZC RECOMMENDATION: with policy recommendations in the Avon buildings of varying sizes along the street to be compatible with surrounding development, The PZC recommends that Town Council APPROVE the Minor PUD Amendment Application (Revisions dated December 31, 2013) with the following conditions: (1) The Subdivision Plat for the Minervini PUD shall ensure that the non -developable areas include allowances for utilities as well as their access and maintenance. (2) The Subdivision Plat for the Minervini PUD shall ensure that all lot line easements are Utility and Drainage easements, with the exception of the front lot line easement which shall be a Slope Maintenance, Utility, Drainage, and Snow Storage Easement. THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE HEREBY APPROVED: BY: Jim Clancy, PZC Chairperson DATE: FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION LOTS 15 & 16, BLOCK 4, WILRIDGE SUBDIVISION — MINERVINI MINOR PUD AMENDMENT Page 2 of 2