The URL can be used to link to this page

PZC Packet 080205��, Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission A VON AugMeeting ust 2, 2005 C O L 0 K A D 0 Meetings Held At: Avon Town Council Chambers Meetings are open to the public Avon Municipal Building 1400 Benchmark Road 5:00 pm Commission Work Session (Discussion of Items on Agenda) - REGULAR MEETING AGENDA - I. Call to Order at 5:30 pm II. Roll Call III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda IV. Conflicts of Interest V. Consent Agenda: Approval of the July Wh, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes. VI. Town Zoning Code Additions & Amendments (5:35pm — 6:00pm) PUBLIC HEARING Applicant: John Dunn, Town Attorney Description: The Commission to review a proposed Ordinance to amend Section 17.08 of the Avon Municipal Code as it relates to the definition of 'Dwelling' (Section 17.08.230) and 'Hotel' (Section 17.08.380). The proposed Ordinance would add Section 17.08.385 to the Avon Municipal Code for the definition of "lodge" and would clarify the definition of 'lodge' in the Wildridge PUD. This is a public hearing prior to the second reading by Town Council on August 9, 2005. VII. Comprehensive Plan Update (6:00pm - 7:OOpm) - PUBLIC HEARING Description: Review the planning principles and recommendations within the Low Priority Districts (Subareas) and work through Draft Plan Observation Summary as it pertains to the Low Priority Districts. VIII. PUD Amendment I Sheraton Mtn. Vista (7:00pm — 7:15pm) PUBLIC HEARING - Tabled from July 19, 2005 Meeting & Tabling Requested to August 16, 2005 Property Location: Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision/140 West Beaver Creek , Boulevard Applicant/Owner Points of Colorado, Inc Description: A request for an amendment to the Lot C PUD to modify the existing property rights and , zoning for Lots 2C, 3, 4, and 5 (Phase 1C). This application proposes to eliminate a 125 -room hotel— and restaurant, and increases the number of time-share units in the project's last phase of development. The review for this application will be broken into two separate meeting. The background of Lot C and the land use portion of this application will be discussed at this hearing. The applicant has requested another tabling of this application to the August 16, 2005 meeting. IX. Moehring Landscape Modifications (7:15pm - 7:30pm) -.Tabled From July 19, 2005 Meeting Property Location: Lot 58, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision 15170 Longsun Lane Posted on July 29, 2005 at the following public places within the Town of Avon: • Avon Municipal Building, main lobby • Avon Recreation Center, main lobby • Alpine Bank, main lobby • City Market, main entrance bulletin board • On the Internet at htto://www.avon.ora / Please call (970) 748.4030 for directions Applicant. Robert Moehring, RMI Vail / Owners: David and Kathy Ferguson Description: At the Commission's June 1, 2004 meeting, a final design plan was approved for the subject property with the condition that additional landscaping shall be included on a revised landscape plan to be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A revised plan has been provided to staff and the Commission will review this revised plan. X. Final Design—Campbell Duplex (7:30pm — 7:45pm) Property Location: Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision/2160 Long Spur Applicant. Gerald Miramonti / Owner. Patrick Campbell Description: Gerald Meremonte is proposing a duplex on this Long Spur property. The proposed design utilizes a predominately stucco exterior with a flat roof design. The structure totals approximately 6,500 square feet. A sketch design for this structure was reviewed at the Commission's June 7, 2005 XI. Sketch Design — Lot 48 Duplex (7:45pm — 8:00pm) Property Location: Lot 48, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision/5151 'Longsun Applicant: Andrew Royster, Fieldstone Development Description: Andrew Royster of Fieldstone Development is proposing a duplex on this half acre property on Longsun Lane. Both units of the duplex feature a mirrored floor plan layout, with 3,120 square feet of living space. Proposed materials include vertical wood siding, stucco, and stone accents. The property is on the downhill side of Longsun Lane and bordered by a developed duplex to the north, a vacant duplex parcel to the south, and an Open Space parcel at the bottom of the property. XII. Other Business (8:00pm - 8:15pm) A. Fence Application Property Location: Lot 63, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision/4281 Wildridge Road West Applicant/Owner. Henry Schneidman Description: This application is for a fence that has already been installed. The fence construction is with rounded logs and chicken wire, and is intended to keep the owner's dogs contained to their property. The fence was installed in the same location as a split rail fence that existed. XII. Adjourn (8:15pm) Posted on July 29, 2005 at the following public places within the Town of Avon: • Avon Municipal Building, main lobby • Avon Recreation Center, main lobby • Alpine Bank, main lobby • City Market, main entrance bulletin board • On the Internet at http://www.avon.org / Please call (970) 748.4030 for directions ,J Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting VON�i Minutes V O N � o July 19, 2005 5:00 pm — 5:30 pm Commission Work Session Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:35 pm. Roll Call All Commissioners were in attendance with the exception of Commissioner Evans. III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda There were no additions or amendments to the Agenda. IV. Conflicts of Interest There were no conflicts to report. V. Consent Agenda: • Approval of the July 5th, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes. An addition to these minutes was voiced by Commissioner D'Agostino regarding Lot 34, Block 2 that conditions about parking, although it will be officially documented in the PUD Amendment, need to be put in place. Commissioner Struve motioned for approval of the Consent Agenda and Commissioner Buckner seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 to 0 with Commissioner Green abstaining due to his absence at the last meeting. VI. PUD Amendment I Sheraton Mtn. Vista - PUBLIC HEARING- REQUEST FOR TABLING RECEIVED ON JULY 93, 2005 Property Location: Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision/140 West Beaver Creek Boulevard Applicant/Owner. Points of Colorado, Inc Description: A request for an amendment to the Lot C PUD to modify the existing property rights and zoning for Lots 2C, 3, 4, and 5 (Phase 1C). This application proposes to eliminate a 125 - room hotel and restaurant, and increases the number of time-share units in the project's last phase of development. Eric Heidemann presented the request for tabling and indicated that the applicant desired a tabling to the next hearing date. The Commission opened the hearing to public comment. Open Public Meeting No public comment was voiced. Closed Public Meeting The Commission questioned the reasoning for the tabling, asking if the applicant was present, and Mr. Heidemann responded that the applicant preferred to discuss the application in greater detail with staff and required another two weeks to do so. Commissioner Struve motioned to table to the next hearing date Item VI, PUD Amendment / Sheraton Mtn. Vista, Property Location: Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision/140 West Beaver Creek Boulevard, with Commissioner Savage seconding the motion to table and all commissioners were in favor. VII. Final Design — Wells Fargo Drive through Property Location: Lot 22AB, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision/245 Chapel Place Applicant: Greg Gastineau, Timberline Commercial Management, Description: Greg Gastineau is proposing this final design plan to add a canopy and drive through lanes for a drive up banking facility. The proposed drive through would be located on the former "chapel' site, behind the City Market grocery store. Materials and colors of the canopy would match the existing building to the south (Building C), and the bank occupies the entire first floor of the building. Matt Pielsticker presented the staff report to the Commission. Commissioner Green began the review by questioning the exterior synthetic coating and its need to match the existing building stucco color. Commissioner Green continued by discussing the existing landscaping weeds and trees and commented that he would prefer to see new native grasses or drought tolerant plant materials used and that there should be a conscious effort to relocate the existing trees, however should they perish, they must be replaced. Commissioner Green voiced that curb cuts were warranted. Commissioner D'Agostino continued on the issue of landscaping and commented she would like to see the area between driveway and the property line on the south side be re -vegetated and have temporarily irrigation installed and sought clarification with the flat roof drains and their drainage. Matt Pielsticker commented that a final landscaping plan was forthcoming. Commissioner D'Agostino commented on the lights and if they are on a timer as they were numerous and bright, clarification of usage was requested. Commissioner D'Agostino questioned the four new windows and their scale and proportion. Mr. Pielsticker responded that the drive thru windows were at issue as the other two were approved previously and they were 4 by 7. Commissioner D'Agostino sought clarity with the trees to be provided and Mr. Katieb voiced that they must conform to the guidelines with at least 6 feet. Commissioner Struve commented on the landscaping need. Commissioner Buckner questioned the wheel chair accessible parking spots and the need for curb cuts and/or additional handicapped spots. Commissioner Smith mentioned concern with vehicle egress from the turning lane of the drive thru. Commissioner Savage commented on the need to adhere to the Master Landscape Plan for Chapel Square. Commissioner Struve motioned for approval of Item VII, Final Design — Wells Fargo Drive through, Property Location: Lot 22AB, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision/245 Chapel Place, with the following 9 conditions; the first 6 as listed on the Staff Report, #7 - north parking area be ADA compliant and wheel chair accessible for all parking spaces; #8 - landscape plan be reviewed by staff and meet the criteria for Chapel Square master landscaping plan and any vegetation that dies in the first two years must be replaced; #9 - staff review with applicant regarding the timing of the Halogen lights. Commissioner Green amended for another condition that the colors of the new exterior materials match the existing colors for a visibly uniform appearance. Commissioner Green seconded the motion with all commissioners in favor and the motion passed unanimously. 7 VIII. Minor Project - Grzywinski Duplex Material & Color Changes Property Location: Lot 16, Block 1, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision/4040 Eaglebend Drive Applicant/Owner. Todd Grzywinski Description: The applicant is proposing a change to the approved siding color and to replace portions of stucco with moss rock veneer. Also proposed is a change to the stucco color and driveway material from asphalt to concrete. The duplex is currently under construction. Matt Pielsticker presented the staff report. Commissioner D'Agostino questioned the aluminum window cladding color and commented that it did not look maroon. Todd Grzywinski, applicantlowner, approached the podium to address commissioner concerns. Commissioner Savage asked why Mr. Grzywinski changed the colors, and Mr. Grzywinski responded that the moss rock changes would look nicer with the green stain. Commissioner Struve was interested in what the alternatives would be for color as this color is too dark. Commissioner D'Agostino voiced that the change to rock and the columns were good changes, but the colors were too dark and needed to be lightened. Commissioner Green commented the project needed to be lightened up. Commissioner Savage stated that the color is too dark and the stone was a nice change. Commissioner Smith agreed with the comments of her fellow commissioners that the color was too dark and needed to go, and the stone was a good change. Chris Ekrem, Eaglebend property owner, Lot 15, approached the podium to comment that the home's color was darker than intended but looked well against its stucco; and there is a gray home in the neighborhood that resembles a battleship and that the colors selected to this home were in good contrast and looked well. Commissioner D'Agostino motioned to approve Item VIII, Minor Project - Grzywinski Duplex, Material & Color Changes, Property Location: Lot 16, Block 1, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision/4040 Eaglebend Drive, the modification of a stone wainscot and column deck support to moss rock as presented and approved the minor color change on the stucco and the change on the driveway from asphalt to concrete and the snow melt is not to exceed the property line, maroon clad windows are approved, and not to approve the evergreen siding as submitted but to return with samples of the lightening of the siding to the commission. Commissioner Savage seconded the motion. Commissioner Green began recourse of the motion, as this motion was defeated 4 to 2. Further discussion focused on the impact to the neighborhood and the possibility of getting approval from four property owners, two on either side of the project. Commissioner Struve made motion to approve all items with the exception of the stain color and the acceptance of the color is with the approval of the neighbors on both sides, four signatures, two lots on each side. Commissioner Struve continued that if he could not get approval from the neighbors and if it going to be re -stained within the next ten years, approval by the commissioners is required. Commissioner Green seconded. Commissioner Buckner thought one neighbor on either side needed to approve the color and that return for coloring was unnecessary. Commissioner Struve amended the conditions to include the neighbor approval with Commissioner Buckner seconding for one neighbor on each side and the motion tied, 3 to 3. Commissioner Savage motioned to table for a seven member commission. Commissioner Buckner questioned Mr. Grzywinski on the signatures and Mr. Grzywinski responded that he could get three out of four as the neighbor to the west would not sign off anyway. Commissioner Struve motioned for approval with the conditions as listed on the Staff Report and the return of the applicant with a solution for the color issue. Commissioner Savage seconded the motion and all commissioners were in favor. IX. Other Business A. Moehring Landscape Modifications Property Location: Lot 58, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision /5170 Longsun Lane Applicant: Robert Moehring, RMI Vail / Owners: David and Kathy Ferguson Description: At the Commission's June 1, 2004 meeting, a final design plan was approved for the subject property with the condition that additional landscaping shall be included on a revised landscape plan to be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A revised plan has been provided to staff and the Commission will review this revised plan. Matt Pielsticker discussed the staff report to the commissioners. Commissioner Green questioned the plans and if an engineer reviewed the planting plan in response to an October 2004 letter. Commissioner Green commented that there were major technical issues regarding root structure and their growth over a twenty-year period. Commissioner D'Agostino voiced that a geotechnical engineer and a landscape engineer are necessary to comment on the root issues and the irrigation situation on a long-term basis so the structural integrity of the wall is not compromised in the future. Commissioner Struve motioned to table until the applicant is present at a Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Green seconded the motion and all commissioners were in favor. Commissioner Green questioned receiving the results of the Charette, Eric Heidemann, senior planner, voiced that it would be presented to Town Council. All public comments were present to the planners. Mr. Heidemann continued that that Lot 12 has appealed to Town Council and will be present at the first Council Meeting in August. Bear comments were discussed in the Wildridge areas. X. Adjourn Commissioner Savage motioned to adjourn; Commissioner Struve seconded the motion. All Commissioners were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 pm. Respectfully submitted, Ruth Weiss Recording Secretary r APPROVED: Terry Smith Vice Chairman Phil Struve Secretary UI uC177\►17iluTl TO: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM: TOWN ATTORNEY RE: ORDINANCE NO. 05-08 (RELATING TO DEFINITIONS OF LODGE AND DWELLING AND AMENDING THE WILDRIGE PUD) DATE: JULY 27, 2005 At a recent meeting of the Town Council, there were complaints by the public regarding use of a residence at 5350 Ferret Lane in Wildridge for short term rental to large groups of people. Persons at the meeting described problems with noise, parking and trash. Review of the Town's sales tax records confirmed that the owner of that residence had remitted substantial amounts of accommodation taxes to the Town. Town staff located a website for the property as well as for other properties being similarly rented out. Also, council members expressed their own awareness that properties in Wildridge are rented out short term. There was a consensus of the Council that renting to small groups was acceptable but that renting to large groups so as to cause noise, trash and parking problems needed to be addressed. Ordinance No. 05-08, a copy of which is included in your packet and which has been posted for public hearing, was adopted by the Council at their meeting on July 12. The purpose of this ordinance was to correct the particular problem identified, that the definition of "lodge" contained on the Wildridge plat and in the Town code does not address the problem presented by a single-family dwelling which is short -termed to large groups of people. At the time of the adoption of the ordinance, council members made several suggestions of changes, which have now been incorporated into a second draft of the ordinance. That second draft, with the changes shown, is also included in your packet. The recitals of the ordinance recite the problem identified by Council: 1. Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined, and Section 17.08.380, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Hotel, Motel, and Lodge" as "a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, intended for temporary occupancy of guests." Because the Code defines "accommodation unit" as "a room or group of rooms, without a kitchen," "hotel, motel and lodge" are lumped together as a hotel type use without any distinction among them. 2. There is no definition in the zoning title of the Code which encompasses the type of use complained of, a ski lodge type use where large groups of people are housed in a dwelling -Ia unit with common kitchen and dining facilities. "Motel' is not even otherwise used in the zoning title (except in the definition of "dwelling," which is why that definition is amended). 3. The final subdivision plat of the Wildridge planned unit development, recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, defines "Dwelling Unit" as not to include "Hotels, Lodge Units.... or similar units." Particularly with the addition of "or similar units," the Wildridge plat is ambiguous as to whether short-term rentals were and are permitted in residential areas. To correct the deficiencies of the Code and the ambiguity of the Wildridge plat, the ordinance limits accommodation facilities to two types, the hotel and the lodge. The hotel, at least as it is presently defined, is comprised of three or more accommodation units, i.e., rooms without cooking facilities. A lodge, on the other hand, is now defined as a short term rental facility with common kitchen and dining areas. The ordinance also incorporates the new definition into the Wildridge plat to resolve the ambiguity of the present definition. The dividing line of six persons, with more than that causing the facility to be a lodge, is a starting point which particularly needs your input. That number was intended to allow less intensive rentals. My recommendation is that you recommend to the Council the adoption of Ordinance No. 05-08 with the changes indicated in the revised ordinances and such other changes as you deem appropriate. As I have said, the Council is particularly looking to you to make a recommendation as to the threshold number to be used to trigger the definition of "lodge." It is hoped that the Council will be able to have second reading of the ordinance at their next meeting on August 9. Staff will also appreciate alternative solutions for future review. Ordinance No. 05- 08 is intended to address a particular problem. It may not be the best long term solution. JWD:ipse it TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 05-09 SERIES OF 2005 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 05-08 TO TOWN COUNCIL, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17.08, MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF AVON, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "LODGE" AND "DWELLING" AND AMENDING THE WILDRIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT . WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined "Dwelling" as "not including hotels, lodge units ... or similar units"; and WHEREAS, Section 17.08.230, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Dwelling" as "not including hotel, motel and lodge units"; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined, and Section 17.08.380, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Hotel, Motel, and Lodge" as "a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, intended for temporary occupancy of guests; and WHEREAS, "motels" are not permitted as a use within any zone district within the Town; and WHEREAS, the final subdivision plat of the Wildridge planned unit development ("PUD % recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, defines "Dwelling Unit" as not to include "Hotels, Lodge Units.... or similar units"; and WHEREAS, the Wildridge subdivision is predominantly residential and was not intended to include "lodges," as that term is commonly defined and understood; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that "lodges" or "lodge units" ought to be defined as "a dwelling occupied by more than six (6) paying guests on a temporary (thirty-one (3 1) days or less) basis" so as to clarify the original intent of the Wildridge PUD; and F.Tianning & Zoning CommLutonlResolu110ns110051Res 05-09 Zoning fY11&1dge.4wn&wnts.do WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that "lodge" or "lodge unit," as so defined, is similar to the uses otherwise prohibited by the Wildridge PUD and therefore not permitted as a use within the Wildridge subdivision since its approval; and WHEREAS, a "lodge" or "lodge unit," as so defined, located in a residential neighborhood, is a nuisance in that such a use tends to cause excessive noise, parking problems and the accumulation of trash; and WHEREAS, amendment of the Avon Municipal Code to incorporate that definition of "lodge" promotes consistency and is in the best interest of the residents of the Town of Avon as a whole; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the attached revisions ("Exhibit A') to the Wildridge PUD and the Town of Avon Zoning Code, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the Avon Municipal Code to review the proposed amendments; WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission is appointed by Town Council to review, make recommendations, and render decisions on all zoning applications; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the Town Council the approval of Ordinance 05-08 Series of 2005. ADOPTED THIS 2nd DAY OF AUGUST, 2005 Signed: Chris Evans, Chair Attest: Phil Struve, Secretary Date: Date: F.•IPlanning & Zoning CommtulanMrsolnffonJ12005IReJ 05.09 Zoning Wildrfdge Amendmen[r.doc h ORDINANCE NO. 05--Q8 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17.08, MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF AVON, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "LODGE" AND "DWELLING" AND AMENDING THE WILDR=E PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined "Dwelling' as "not including hotels, lodge units ... or similar units"; and WHEREAS, Section 17.08230, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Dwelling" as "not including hotel, motel and lodge units'; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined, and Section 17.08.380, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Hotel, Motel, and Lodge' as "a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, intended for temporary occupancy of guests; and WHEREAS, "motels" are not permitted as a use within any zone district within the Town; and WHEREAS, the final subdivision plat of the Wildridge planned unit development ("PUD'), recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, defines "Dwelling Unit" as not to include "Hotels, Lodge Units.... or similar units"; and WHEREAS, the Wildridge subdivision is predominantly residential and was not intended to include "lodges," as that term is commonly defined and understood; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that "lodges" or "lodge units" ought to be defined as "a dwelling occupied by more than sir (6) paving guests on a Deleted:letm&d fame temparar7�(thirty one (31) days or less) bash: so as to clarify the ori&inal intent ofthe ...-• Deleted: oc=p y Wnrlr;rine Pl M-Antl ...............�:..." Deleted: ofm dmd: WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that "lodge" or "lodge unit," as so defined, is similar to the uses otherwise prohibited by the Wildridge PUD and therefore not permitted as a use within the Wildridge subdivision since its approval; and WHEREAS, a "lodge' or "lodge unit," as so defined, located in a residential neighborhood, is a nuisance in that such a use tends to cause excessive noise, parking problems and the accumulation of trash; and of the definition of"lodge' of Avon as a whole; that NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO: Section 1. Amendment. Section 17.08.230, Chapter 17.08 of Title 17, Avon Municipal Code, is amended to provide as follows: Dwelling means a building or portion thereof used for residential purposes, including single-family, duplex and multifamily dwellings, but not including hotel or lodge units Sectionl. Amendment. Section 17.08.380, Chapter 17.08 of Title 17, Avon Municipal Code, is amended by deletion of "motel and lodge" from the section title and to provide as follows: Hotel means a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, Deleted: intnded Cm the tmtpm�ry may consist or an omce, tnunary fatuities usea Dy me Dccupams, recreation facilities, a lobby or lounge, kitchen and dining facilities and similar accessory uses commonly found in association with a commercial hotel operation and meeting the requirements of the particular zone district in which the building is located. Section 2. Amendment. Chapter 17.08 of Title 17, Avon Municipal Code, is amended by the addition of a new Section 17.08.385 to provide as follows: Lodge means a building containing common kitchen and dining facilities the (31) days or less) basi but not including abed and breakfast residence. Deleted: of mm than six (0 gcae Section 3. Amendment. The Wildridge planned unit development ("PUD"), as approved by the subdivision plat recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, is amended by the incorporation by reference of the definition contained in Section 2 hereof. Section 4. Aoolicability. This ordinance shall apply to both existing and future buildings within the Town of Avon. INTRODUCED, APPROVED, PASSED ON FIRST READING AND ORDERED POSTED the 12th day of July, 2005, referred for recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and a public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council on the 9th day of August, 2005, at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Towri Clerk INTRODUCED, FINALLY APPROVED, PASSED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED POSTED the 9th day of August, 2005. Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST. Patty McKenny, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John W. Dunn, Town Attorney V Memorandum Design Workshop, Inc. Landscape Architecture To: Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Land Planning Commission Urban Design0 Via: Tambi Katieb Strategic Services From: Rebecca Leonard Date: July 27, 2005 Project Name: Avon Comprehensive Plan Support Project #: 3555 Subject: Agenda for August 2 Meeting Copy To: The proposed agenda for the meeting on August 2 is as follows: 1. Present the Low Priority District section of Comprehensive Plan 2. Work through Draft Plan Observation Summary as it pertains to the Low Priority Districts 3. General discussion of style and content 4. Next steps DESIGNWORKSHOP Asheville • Aspen • Denver • Park City • Phoenix • Santa Fe • Tahoe • Santiago • S8o Paulo 120 East Main Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 • (tel) 970-925-8354 • (fax) 970-920-1387 www.designworkshop.com r 0 Town District Planning Principles I C -A, r'- :V t,,;"; t ; Low Priority Districts District 17. West Residential District The West Residential District is the western gateway to town. Presently, the west residential district consists of the Aspens Mobile Home Park. In recent years, improvements to landscape treatments, fences, and general clean up have resulted in the area presenting itself as a vital, affordable neighborhood. The area has the potential to be redeveloped over time as a higher density, master -planned, affordable residential area. This could be considered in the long-term future of Avon when residential developments in the area reach capacity, and alternative solutions for housing are being sought. Those solutions should include pocket parks and enhanced pedestrian connectivity. Planning Principles and Recommendations: Coordinate with CDOT to introduce low landforms and plantings (trees and shrubs) along the southern I-70 right-of- way to buffer the mobile home park from the interstate and light industrial uses across the interstate. In addition, the view from I-70 to the mobile home park will be screened while preserving views to downtown. • Encourage continued improvements to the visual quality of the area: • Limit building heights to three stories, and require developments to demonstrate preservation of views to the Town Core through the strategic placement of open space or the further limitation of building heights. • Encourage the construction of a pocket park to service the residential development in the area. District 18: River Residential District The River Residential District is a major local's residential area. Much of the river residential district has been developed, but future residential development that will occur along the river beyond the boundaries shown on the Urban Design Plan should be developed in accordance with the recommendations for this District. The major design influences are U.S. Highway 6, the riparian environment along the Eagle River, and public access to the river. Sensitive site planning, architectural detailing, and appropriate setbacks, color, and scale of structure should be used to preserve the character of the river and its associated natural habitat. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 29 Town District Planning Principles Lo u Priority Districh Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Encourage redevelopment to take into consideration the objectives of the Eagle River Watershed Management Plan including river setbacks and best practices for development in proximity to the river. • provide a public access easement, where appropriate, within building: setback areas in new development adjacent to the Eagle River for public cnJoyment of the river and' construction of a public recreationai•trail.'' • Proyide public packing and signage at strategically located truilheada: • ' , • Encourage the further enhancement of the ECO Trail: • Buildings should be oriented to capitalise upon the Eagle River as an amenity. Parking areas, trash dumpsters, and other uses that could potentially disrupt the quality of the river environment should be located away from the river and designed to have the least impact on the river corridor. • Limit building height to a scale that is subordinate to the Town Core and compatible with the river environment. • Plant indigenous trees and shiubs to screen existing huge residential buildings along U.S. Highway 6 and provide landforms and landscaping between residences and U.S. Highway 6. • Enhance the pedestrian experience by adding sidewalks along all roads on the valley floor. • Conduct a Historical Inventery/Evaluation. District 19: Nottingham Park Residential District Nottingham Park is bordered to the west, north, and northeast by existing high quality residential development. Provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and adequate screening of parking and trash areas would help enhance the character of the area. Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Encourage existing development and require redevelopment to screen parking and trash areas with landscaping material. • Require new development to be at least of the same quality Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 30 Town District Planning Principles Lo N P nonly Uistrwi,; and character as existing development. District 20: Nottingham Road Residential District This district is characterized by limited developable area due to steep slopes to the north, frontage on Nottingham Road, which is classified as a commercial collector road, and high exposure to I- 70. Existing residential development is typically multi -family buildings with tasteful architecture. Planning Principles and R®commendationst • Encourage additional informal landscaping of existing-, properties to soften the visual impact of the large structures. • Reseed exposed slopes with native grasses and wildflowers. • Require new development to provide a landscape buffer adjacent to Nottingham Road and I-70. • Encourage redevelopment by offering incentives to landowners. District 21: 1-70 Gateway The interchange on I-70 at Avon Road is the main gateway to the Town. A lighted gateway sign is suitably placed along the west bound off ramp to Avon. However, the gateway approach needs to he redesigned to further enhance the overall image of this gateway. The emphasis should be on the creation of a positive entry experience that extends the character of the Town Core to Avon's front door. Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Enhance the intersections at the ontoff tamps on Avon Road to include streetscape improvements and special landscape features. • improve the I-70 interchange for pedestrians and bikers. District 22: INlldridge Residential District This area consists of a residential subdivision containing varying densities, located on the sunny, south -facing slopes north of the main valley floor. The character for the developed landscape should reflect the area's dry climate and typically steep terrain through the use of low water -requiring plant materials and natural landscaping. Due to the limited amount of existing trees Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 31 Town District Planning Principles Low Priority Districts and shrubs and the open character of the property, special care should be taken to ensure that all structures are compatible,with one another and in harmony with the natural surroundings. Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Construct bicycle lanes along,Metcalf and Wildridge Roads. • Consider a hail system through open space areas in. Wildadge to piovide alternatives to the roadways for pedestrian chcul'atiort; f.a • Preserve and enhance the existing open space hails and ckplore 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: • Improve the intersection of Metcalf and Nottingham Roads, and implement the other recommendations for District 4 to enhance the entry to Wildridge. • 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.' District 23: Mountain Star Residential District This area is a planned unit development established in 1992, of large -lot, single-family homes, located east of Wildridge on the south -facing slopes north of the main valley floor. This covenant -controlled, gated community has its own design review committee. Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Prohibit significant alteration of natural environment and minimize stress on wildlife and loss of habitat. • Consider the development of a trailhead to access the surrounding public lands. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 32 r Town District Planning Principles! Luw Priority Oistric!•, District 24: Swift Gulch District The Town of Avon's Public Works and Transportation Departments are located in the Swift Gulch District. In response to the area's high visibility from 1-70, efforts have been made to screen the existing buildings and facilities and to use materials and colors that blend with the surrounding hillsides. Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Encourage building at a scale that minimizes" visibility from I-70: Require building materials and colors that blend in with the hillsides. e Screen accessory uses with landforms and landscaping. • Encourage sidewalks and pedestrian connections. District 25: Nottingham StadonlEaglebend District The Nottingham Station/Eaglebend District contains single- family and multi -family residential development. The area is mostly developed, with a few remaining individual residential lots still undeveloped. Design issues for development in this area are to address visibility from U.S. Highway 6, the protection and enhancement of the riparian environment along the Eagle River, and appropriate public access along the river. Planning Principles and Recommendations: • Examine the potential to develop pedestrian and bicycle connections between Stonebridge Drive and the Village at Avon Residential and Commercial Districts. • Historic structures such as the Nottingham Ranch House and the water wheel should be evaluated • Encourage development to take into consideration the objectives of the Eagle River Watershed Management Plan including river setbacks and best practices for development in proximity to the river. • Provide a public access easement, where appropriate, within building setback areas in new development adjacent to the Eagle River for public enjoyment of the river and construction of a public recreational nail. • Building should be oriented to capitalize upon the Eagle River as an amenity. Parking areas, trash dumpsters, and Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. Page 33 Town District Planning Principles Low Priority Districts other uses that could potentially disrupt the quality of the river environment should be located away from the river and designed to have the least impact on the river corridor. Set buildings back from the river to preserve its natural character, and step building facades back away from the river to avoid creating a'canyon effect'. • Limit building height to a scale that is subordinate to the. Town Core and compatible with the river environment. Buildings should be designed to step down In height is they near iheriver and in response to the natural topography. • Encourage landforms, landscaping, and sidewalks between residences and U.S. Highway 6. District 26: Village at Avon Northern Residential District This area is part of the Village at Avon P.U.D. of quality, large - lot, single-family homes and some multi -family residential development located on the south -facing slopes north of the main valley floor. This residential area is covenant -controlled, gated community with its own design review committee. This residential area has several provisions for public services and access ways that should be maintained. Further public access arrangements would lie beneficial, including the preservation/ acquisition of public space located adjacent to this area. Planning. Principles and Recommendations: • Encourage further public access arrangements including the preservation/ acquisition of public space located adjacent to this arca. . • Prevent significant alteration of natural landscape as well as ridgeline and steep slope development. This area should be highly sensitive to visual impacts of improvements and lighting. District 27: Northern Hillside Open Space The Northern Hillside Open Space areas are comprised of the steep slopes of the valley wall north of 1-70. These areas are protected from development with some limited informal recreational uses allowed. No further recommendations are made herein. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 34 7 Jul 27 2005 4:10PM P— LRSERJET FOX f ' ` RUTH O. BORNE ATTORNEY AT LAW P.O. BOX 7833 AVON, CO B 1620 (970) 748-1167 FAX (970) 748-11 B9 Admitted to pr.Wce In Florida and Colorado July 26, 2005 Mr. Tambi Katieb Director of Community Development P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 RE: PUD Application for Sheraton Mountain Vista Dear Tambi: On behalf of Points of Colorado, Inc. we are formally requesting a tabling of the PUD Amendment application until the following meeting scheduled for August 16, 2005. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Kind regards, � o Ruth O. Bome P.1 Staff Report PUD August 2"0. 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date July 25, 2005 Project type Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development (PUD) Legal description Lot C, Block 2, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision Current zoning PUD Address 160 W. Beaver Creek Boulevard Introduction The applicant, Points of Colorado Inc., has requested an amendment to the Planned Unit Development ("PUD") for Sheraton Mountain Vista — Lot C. The Sheraton Mountain Vista is a partially built project that borders "Main -Street" to the south, and West Beaver Creek Boulevard to the north. The Lot C PUD is a mixed-use project that includes residential, office and commercial land uses. The developed portion of the project includes 20 employee -housing units, 85 two-bedroom time-share units, and approximately 17,450 square feet of office/retail space. The undeveloped uses include additional timeshare units, general office and retail, restaurant, and the inclusion of a 125 -room hotel. The build -out of the project occurs in three phases: Phases 1A, 1B and IC. The portion of the timeshare and commercial space along with the employee housing has been built in accordance with Phase 1A and 1 B with the majority of ground -level retail and hotel/restaurant occurring in the last phase (Phase 1 C). The amendment request applies to Phase 1 C and the inclusion of an additional Phase 1D, these being the final phases of the project. Phase 1C has a proposed occupancy date of December 1, 2007 and Phase 1D has an occupancy date of December 1, 2011. Phase 1C is currently entitled 48 timeshare units, 5,500 square feet of commercial/retail, 4,800 square feet of restaurant, and a 125 -room hotel. The amendment request would eliminate the restaurant and hotel, reduce the amount of commercial square footage, and Increase the number of time-share units to 64. Phase 1 D would further increase the number of time share units by 70 and increase the commerciaUretail by 2,200 square feet. The merits of the mixed-use project were previously evaluated based on the advantages it offered given the close proximity to "Main Street". Those same considerations will also be of importance with the evaluation of the proposed amendment. The design and nature of land uses for this project is critical to the long-term economic health of downtown and "Main Street". The scale and arrangement of proposed buildings and their orientation with the surrounding development, together with the associated type and mix of uses, will influence where people go to shop, dine out, find lodging, or work. These are all policy consideration outlined in the 1996 Comprehensive Plan and Town Center Implementation Plan (TCP). The Comprehensive Plan describes the Town Center as being the "most intensely developed part of town, as a true urban environment with attractive public gathering places. New development on vacant parcels, as well as redevelopment of existing uses in the Town Center will Include mixed-use buildings containing retail and services on the ground floor, offices and/or Town of Avon Commwity Development (970) 7484030 Fax (070) 9495749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2e°, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 13 residential above, and structured parking and urban amenities such as plazas and walkways. An overall pedestrian network will be developed for the Town Center, to create a truly walkable environment." These policies are also re -affirmed in the TCP. Public Hearing Process: Due to the complexity of the proposed amendment and the nature of the history behind prior amendments and approvals, staff recommends that the public hearing process be separated into a minimum of two consecutive hearing dates at the Planning and Zoning Commission level. The applicant has agreed to this approach in meetings with staff, also noting the amount of material and historical narrative involved in review of this application. The first hearing date should include the review of the existing entitlements and prior amendment history including existing development agreements. This meeting should also include a brief description of the proposed amendments with the opportunity for the Commission to request that specific Information is available or covered in detail at the second of the two public hearings. After hearing the background information and the chronology of events, the Commission would then hold the second public hearing to discuss the proposed amendment and merits thereof. Staff has completed analysis of this project and is providing you with a recommended motion also for your review and consideration throughout the hearing process. Our recommendation is based on significant policy and approval criteria considerations that the application is evaluated against, and those considerations and the staff recommended motion should also be reviewed and evaluated throughout the hearing process. Recommended Action: Based on a thorough evaluation of both policy and approval criteria, Staff is recommending that this application for PUD amendment to the Lot C PUD be DENIED. This recommendation and position is based on several significant issues the application poses that cannot be reconciled or otherwise mitigated through the recommendation of a conditional approval. The most notable issues have been extensively discussed with the applicant and the applicant was offered a joint work -session to discuss these significant departures from the existing entitlements (that offer was declined). The considerations (provided in more detail against the specific design approval criteria and findings required) are comprised of: 1) Mixed Use goals of existing PUD: The elimination of approximately 3,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, 4,800 sq.ft of restaurant space, and the 125 -room hotel does not enhance but undermines the quality of mixed uses as compared to what is currently approved. 2) Design and massing: As submitted, the application fails to comply with the newly adopted design guidelines for the commercial core area in terms of scale, orientation, and interface with Main Street. 3) Parking: By apply the standing parking requirement in the Avon Municipal Code, including the provision for the mixed-use reduction, the proposed parking appears to be significantly deficient without an explanation of how to address these deficiencies (pay -in -lieu, variance, etc). 4) Technical Issues: Our calculations indicate the proposed PUD will Increase water rights requirements by approximately 24.72 acre feet above the water rights required to supply the development under the original zoning. In addition, the phasing of the development is delayed Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2"", 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 13 considerably. Additionally, the financial considerations as noted by the Town's consultant are attached to this report and will ultimately require review and consideration by the Town Council as part of their review of the proposal and potential negotiation of revised entitlements with the applicant. Background The Lot C PUD background and context is important to understand when reviewing the amendment proposed. Following is an abbreviated timeline of significant events associated with the creation of this PUD (relevant documents are attached as exhibits to this report): 1998: PUD Development Agreement On October 27, 1998, Town Council entered into a Development Agreement with Vail Associates, Avon Commercial Center Ltd, and Shapiro Development Company for Lot C and the Confluence Property. The agreement (attached) outlined the zoning entitlements for both properties ahead of the review and execution of a final development plan. However, the recitals of the agreement noted: "Owner desire to develop the Confluence and Tract C as mixed use developments... which may include lodging, restaurant, retail, parking, public facilities, open space, office, commercial conference center and other uses" The agreement (which was joined with and annexation of the Confluence property) also provided for both rebates and exactions between the Town and the development owner(s). Attached to the agreement as "Section II" are the development standards for the Lot C property. The stated intent of the development standards and uses listed was: "To complement the surrounding town center developments, future development and expansions and to provide a variety of uses on Lot C such as lodges; commercial establishments and expansions and offices in a predominantly pedestrian environment." Further, the building height, parking standards and maximum density provisions were outlined in the same agreement (provided by the applicant in the application for review). 1999: Pre -application to PUD Development Plan On September 27, 1999, the Town Council discussed the merits of the concept for the Lot C property and to chart the course of negotiations for the development agreement. The most significant points of this review and discussion were noted in follow up correspondence from the Community Development Department and include: (1) The consensus was that ground -level retail space needs to be significantly increased and designed to attract pedestrians along the perimeter of the project; (2) The courtyard is not inviting to pedestrians; (3) The overall massing needs architectural interest through the addition of elements and articulation such as recesses, balconies, dormers, avoiding straight vertical walls, and more variety in fenestration; (4) The project is somewhat isolated from the rest of the Town Center. It should encourage linkage to other buildings and avoid the appearance of an individual project." 1999: Planning & Zoning Commission Concept Review & Final PUD Recommendations Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot E PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision ' August Zed, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 13 Following those comments and considerations identified by Town Council in the Executive Session and by Staff in subsequent correspondence, the applicant submitted a "Concept Review" PUD application. The application proposed the following: - 140 two-bedroom timeshare units - 136 Hotel Rooms - 24 Employee Housing Units - 17,000 square feet of retail Significant issues and discussion centered on the following policy areas: - Conformance with the 1996 Comprehensive Plan, Subarea 13 ('Town Center"); and - "More retail development is needed to achieve the vertically mixed-use recommend by the Comprehensive Plan and Design Guidelines"; and - 'The project and buildings appear to be massive... more architectural elements and articulation must be incorporated"; and - 'The roof overhangs are minimal and require better proportion to the walls.n A copy of the Planning Commission Review and staff reports summarizing Planning and Zoning Commission comments is attached for reference to this report. After several meetings and a work -session, the Planning Commission finally recommended approval of the Lot C Final Development Plan through Resolution 99-18 (attached for reference). The motion forwarded to Town Council included significant 'course corrections' to policy considerations of the Town Comprehensive Plan, which included: The hotel and retail phase being constructed in Phase 1A. The two-bedroom time-share units counted as one dwelling unit, not being able to be further subdivided, sold, transferred, conveyed, leased or subleased separately. Allowance for the PUD Development Plan (site plan) to be modified by reducing the number of time-share units to accommodate the required parking, additional retail space, employee housing units, or hotel units without requiring a formal PUD Amendment. 2000: Town Council review and approval On February 22, 2000, Town Council unanimously approved the PUD site development plan through Ordinance 2000-02. Several key considerations that were forwarded by the Planning Commission as recommendations in Resolution 99-18 were deleted by Town Council, including: Requiring the hotel and retail space to be constructed in Phase 1 A. Disallowing the further subdivision of timeshare units Into 2 separate units. Requiring a common area with a fireplace on each floor of the employee housing project. Concurrent with the approval of the PUD site development plan through Ordinance 00-02, the development agreement was amended to codify the new development standards. The property was sold to Vistana after the completion of the PUD process. 2000-2005: Final Design Aoarovals and Phasing Constructed Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2od, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 13 After purchase of the property, Vistana submitted Phase 1A through the design review process in the spring of 2000. Phase 1A, as required by the approved development standards, comprised: 50 timeshare units 20 employee -housing units 5,800 square feet of retail (Inc. lobby/check in) The Planning and Zoning Commission held several work sessions to review the plans as well as on-site mockups, and on May 11, 2000 the applicant received Phase 1A final design approval and subsequently began construction. Likewise, in spring of 2002, the applicant submitted for and received design approval for Phase 1 B, which included: 35 timeshare units 15,750 GLFA commercial building along the mall, with at least 5,250 of retail on the ground floor 11 parking spaces Though both phases were constructed in accordance with the design approvals, the construction of the garage only included 164 spaces- 16 spaces less than the required 180. In order to permit the construction of Phase 1-B, the owner agreed to correct the parking space deficiency by build -out (using temporary surface parking space in Phase 1B). Should the total required parking spaces not be physically possible, the owner committed to either seek the 'pay in lieu' or other arrangements as agreeable to the Town (See the Oct. 31, 2001 letter attached for reference). Summary of proposed amendment: Land Use The approved PUD was represented and approved as a'mixed-use project that included •hotel lodging, timeshares, restaurant, retail, office, commercial conference center, and other uses. While the project currently contains 85 timeshare units, 20 employee housing units, and approximately 17,000 square feet of retail/offices uses, the proposed amendment is a departure from the level or quality of mixed uses that was originally approved. The elimination of approximately 3,000 square feet of commercial space, 4,800 square feet of restaurant space, and the 125 -room hotel to be substituted for additional timeshare units runs counter to the planning principles outlined in the _1990.Comorehensive Plan and the adopted 2001 Town Center Implementation Plan. (See Policy A3.6, B2.3, and Subarea 1: West Town Center District). In addition, the proposal Includes a change in use for the proposed remaining ground level retail portion of the PUD. The applicant proposes to add "professional office" uses to the PUD whereby the applicant would be permitted to utilize uses such as professional offices in place of the preferred and currently permitted retail uses on the ground level. To propose this change as a use by right will significantly alter the character and function of the project. The table below represents the quantity and type of land uses that are included in the approved PUD compared to the proposed PUD. Town of Avon Community Devalopment (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 L.ot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2od 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 of 13 ber of Units/Square lvumoer or unasiagt Footage Footage (Existing PUD) (Proposed PUD) Land Use Units Square Units Square Feet Feet Timeshare 133/266' 219/438` Dwelling units dwelling units Employee 20 units 20 units Housing Hotel rooms 125 rooms 0 Restaurant 4,800 0 s uare feet Commercial 27,050 23,750 (Office square feet Square feet Retail 'The existing and proposed timeshare units represent two subdlvldable units. Therefore, the number of timeshare units has been doubled for the purposes of calculating dwelling unit density. Don i The currently approved residential density of this PUD Is 133 subdividable units, or 266 dwelling units, and 20 employee housing units. The proposed density of 219 units, or 438 dwelling units, represent an approximate 65% increase in dwelling units or 135 units per acre (3.24 acres / 438 units). By comparison, the Town Center (TC) zone, the predominant zoning district in the Town Core, permits only 30 units per acre. The existing PUD entitlements provide for 82units per acre. Staff finds it difficult to support the drastic percentage increased in residential density given the corresponding decrease In percentage of commercial/retail use. While density is necessary to create the vitality required to activate the Town Center District, and in the near future connect with a pedestrian scale urban experience to the Confluence property and ultimately the resort experience, increasing density alone will not contribute to the place -making opportunity that not only exists on Lot C but properties In the district. Further, while creating a wholly timeshare project may not necessarily be a detriment to the district considering the 'hot beds' it will create, the elimination and complete minimization of both retail and restaurant space that naturally occurs in hotels - an existing requirement in the Lot C PUD- does nothing to keep the guests of those hot beds in the district. Increases in density should be considered carefully and equally measured with not only additional 'mixed use' elements such as commercial and retail space, but thoughtfully crafted and articulated to create anchor tenant experiences- such as a prominent restaurant or regional entertainment experience -that both supports the concept of this district and provides a rationale for density above and beyond the underlying zoning and existing entitlements and the creation of a single type of lodging (i.e. timeshares exclusively). scale/Mass Given the proximity of the site to Main Street, it is imperative that the street level architecture enhances pedestrian activity and encourages a lively center of retail activity. The scale and massing of the proposed buildings (Phase 1C and 1D) minimizes the appearance of stepping Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Y ,sta Subdivision August god, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 7 of 13 the structure down in mass towards the mall area. The building appears to stand-alone and creates a barrier to the future "public spaces" located along the mall. Both the Design Guidelines and the Comprehensive Plan require special attention to be given to the height, width, and length of the proposed structures to maximize the comfort to users of both Lot C and Main Street. Staff believes this can be achieved by stepping -down the massing considerably and enhancing the pedestrian areas by opening the site up for pedestrian circulation. Additionally, staff believes that the architecture should visually incorporate an anchor retail or entertainment tenant with prominent visibility to the pedestrian experience the Town is creating in the West Town Center District. The massing proposed minimizes that exposure and removes the potential for that type of experience by guests to the project. Although the proposed building heights (Phase 1C and Phase 1D) are not attempting to exceed 100 foot maximum, staff's recommends that the building height be reduced or scaled down considerably as the development approaches Main Street. By comparison, the existing PUD does more to achieve this compared to the proposed PUD. Relationship to surrounding development and Main Street Lot C is an integral part of the Town Core and should complement the surrounding town center developments and future development by providing a variety of uses. This site serves as an anchor for Main Street and the originally approved ground -level retail space and restaurant provides a greater opportunity to attract pedestrians along the perimeter of the project. It is important to the Town that this project interacts with the Town Center Mall. As proposed, the amendment alters the function of the project with the elimination of the restaurant and hotel component of the project. As previously noted, the allowed uses proposed add "professional office" at ground level as a use by right and the applicant has not specifically noted this in the narrative of the application. Parkin The required parking for the site, existing and proposed, has been a challenge for staff to reconcile. The existing PUD was approved based on a parking standard (ratio) that was the outcome of negotiation with the former Town Council. Our approach to reconciling the parking is to apply the standing parking requirement in the Avon Municipal Code, including the provision for the mixed-use reduction. These are parking standards that are applied uniformly throughout the Town. Based on our calculations, the proposed parking appears to be deficient. Staff has requested the applicant to provide an explanation of how they plan to address these deficiencies (pay -in -lieu, variance, etc.) Total Required 470 Total Provided 340 Deficient (130) Town of Avon Community Development (970) 749.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot a PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2°d, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 8 of 13 With the adoption of the -2001 PUD, the Town approved the development of 133 timeshare units. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation to Council at that time was that the units would not be subdividable. However, the Council permitted the subdivision of the units making the existing augmentation plan deficient of water rights for this project. Staff is recommending that any change to the PUD include the provision for additional water rights to supplement the augmentation plan. Based on staffs calculation of the proposed PUD amendment, the proposed PUD will increase water rights requirements by approximately 24.72 acre feet above the water rights required to supply the development under the original zoning. The application does not address this deficiency. Therefore, we would ask the applicant to explain how these additional water rights will be provided to the Town for this additional demand. Financial Analysis Stan Bernstein and Associates, a financial consultant contracted by the Town to evaluate the fiscal impacts of both the existing and proposed PUD, and prepared an internal memo dated April 21, 2005 outlining concerns regarding the Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by Pricewaterhouse Cooper L.L.P (see attached). Staff shares these same concerns, and while the fiscal analysis methodology appears supportable by the Town's financial consultant, there remain the following concerns as noted below by Stan Bernstein: Incremental General Fund Revenue Expenditure and Fund Balances Original Development Planning Scenario — indicates at project stabilization annual General Fund deficits of approximately $44,000. This compares to annual General Fund deficits at project stabilization of approximately $33,000 assuming the Modified Development Planning Scenario as presented in Appendix 2. If the Modified Development is approved, I think it would be appropriate and reasonable to Increase the assumed $28.021weekly interval Recreation Amenities Fee by approximately 13% to $31.661weekly interval. This modest increase would, on an annual basis, generate an additional $33,500 and would show a break-even General Fund balance at project stabilization. You should also be aware that the annual $44,000 General Fund deficit as presented on Appendix 1 (Original Development Scenario) is partially caused by the Town only receiving 25% of the Accommodation and Sales Taxes generated from the assumed 125 -room hotel through the year 2022. Beginning in 2023 the Town would begin receiving 100% of the Accommodation and Sales Taxes generated from the assumed 125 -roam hotel and an additional $165,000 annually would be received by the Town's. General Fund. Consequently, if the financial planning horizon were to be extended beyond 2020 (as presented on Appendix 1), beginning in 2023 the Town's annual General Fund balances would indicate $121,000 (positive instead of negative fund balances of $44,000 as shown on Appendix 1). So, from a long-term perspective the Original Planning Scenario would show annual General Fund balances of approximately $121,000 compared to the annual negative fund balances of $33;000 shown on Appendix 2 for the Modified Planning Scenario. Incremental Real Estate Transfer Tax Revenues Both financial planning scenarios assume that the Town shares Real Estate Transfer Tax ("RETT") revenues from initial sales (not secondary sales) with SVO. Both scenarios assume that the average price for each interval week is $31,643, which "PWC believes to be a reasonable assumption. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748.4030 - Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain vista Subdivision August 2vd, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 9 of 13 For the Original Development Scenario, initial sales of approximately 2,496 interval weeks (48 units multiplied by 52 weeks) would generate 2% RETT revenues of approximately $1,580,000 ($79 million in gross sales) with approximately $790,000 retained by the Town and $790,000 shared with SVO. Secondary REIT revenues (entire 2% retained by the Town) are estimated to be approximately $79,000 annually at project stabilization assuming a 5% annual resale rate. Incremental Real Estate Transfer Tax Revenues For the Modified Development Scenario, initial sales of approximately 6,188 interval weeks (55 phase 1 units and 64 phase 2 units multiplied by 52 weeks) would generate 20/6 RETT revenues of approximately $3,916,000 with $1,958,000 retained by the Town and $1,958,000 shared with SVO. Secondary RETT revenues (entire 2% retained by the Town) are estimated to be approximately $196,000 annually at project stabilization based upon a 5% annual resale rate. It is my understanding that the Town has retained in a special escrow account, approximately $1.5 million of REIT revenues collected from interval week sales from Phase 1 of the Sheraton Mountain Vista Resort. It is my understanding that in accordance with the initial development agreement with SVO, these $1.5 million of RETT revenue collections are only payable to SVO if a 125 room hotel is constructed (i.e., the Original Development Scenario). Consequently, if I understand this agreement correctly, in the event that the Modified Development Scenario is approved, the Town would retain these $1.5 million of RETT revenues. A key policy decision that the Town Council needs to wrestle with is what percentage, if any, of RETT revenues should be shared with SVO? And, if RETT revenue is shared with SVO, how will SVO use these revenues? Under the Modified Development Scenario approximately $1,958,000 of RETT revenues would be shared with SVO or the Mountain Vista Metro District to offset parking related construction costs. Considering that SVO is anticipating gross sales revenues of approximately $196 million from the sale of interval ownership weeks if the Modified Development Scenario is approved, compared to only $79 million from interval ownership sales based upon the Original (currently approved) Development Scenario, perhaps approval of the Modified Scenario is sufficiently generous and additional sharing of any of the RETT revenues is overly generous. The developers of the Confluence are not proposing any sharing of RETT revenues with the Town. Another factor that should be considered by the Town Council, is that the SVO project will be competing with the proposed Confluence project which also includes 132 interval ownership units (6,864 weeks) in what could be perceived as being in a better location. Impact Fees The Original Development Scenario would generate approximately $582,000 of one-time Water Tap Fees for the Town, compared to $952,000 assuming the Modified Development Scenario. The Original Development Scenario would generate approximately $365,000 of one-time Construction Permit Fees, compared to $455,000 assuming the Modified Development Scenario. Water rights that would have to be purchased by the developer for the modified scenario are not included in this report. Mountain Vista Metropolitan District Impacts Assessed valuation generated from the Original Development Scenario is estimated to $3,443,605 at project stabilization compared to $2,590,653 for the Modified Development Scenario. This loss of approximately $850,000 of assessed valuation represents a loss of Town of Awn Commurdty Development (970) 749-00M Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C•PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2od, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 10 of 13 approximately $382,500 annually of property tax revenues assuming a 45 mill levy for Mountain Vista Metropolitan District. It is my understanding that these property tax revenues are supposed to be transferred to Avon Station/Confluence Metropolitan Districts and used to help finance regional improvements including a conference center and perhaps a gondola system. Annual Guest Nights Annual incremental guest nights generated from the Modified Development Scenario are estimated to be approximately 163,000 compared to 109,000 for the Original Development Scenario. Other Key Assumptions include: Hotel Guest Expenditures per Day Subject to Town 4% Sales Tax $26 Interval Guest/Owner Expenditures per Day Subject to Town Sales Tax $22 Interval Owners Annual Occupancy Rate of 80% with 4.5 Persons Occupying Each Week Interval Rentals Annual Occupancy Rate of 10% of Owner Weeks with 4.0 Persons Occupying Each Week at an ADR of $260. Hotel Annual Occupancy Rate of 55% with an ADR of $110 and 1.7 Persons Occupying Each Hotel Room. No Gondola is Assumed; Ski Season and Non -Ski Season Bus Operating Costs Based Upon Incremental Guest Nights and Required Incremental New Buses and Hourly Operating Rate of $47 per Hour. Though the financial model provided by the applicant demonstrates that the amendment proposed may provide a financial benefit to the Town over the original scenario, it is important to consider that the analysis is a dynamic model subject to many assumptions, as noted by Stan Bemstein. Also critical to the Commission's review role is to provide Town Council with an informed review of the land use and development plan design issues for consideration in light of the potential financial benefits of the proposal. Please consider that the economic function of the project and the projected benefit of one scenario versus another comprises only one aspect of a total review of the land use proposed and should be so measured in your recommendation to the elected policy body. PUD Design Criteria According to the Town of Avon Zoning Code, Section 17.20.110(h), it shall be the burden of the applicant to demonstrate that submittal material and the proposed development plan comply with each of the following design criteria or demonstrate that one or more of them is not applicable, or that a particular development solution consistent with the public interest has been achieved. Where the PUD is being requested in connection with the review of a development agreement pursuant to Chapter 17.14, not all design criteria may be applicable, as determined by the Community Development Department. The following design criteria shall be used as the principal criteria in evaluating a PUD: 1. Conformance with the 1996 Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. Town of Avon community Development (970) 749-40M Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2od, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page l 1 of 13 Policy A3.6: Encourage mixed-use development throughout the community, where compatible with existing neighborhoods, to more efficiently use land. Staff Response: The proposed amendment would reduce the quality or character of mix of uses with the elimination of the hotel, restaurant, and a portion of the commercial space. This request appears to be counter productive to this policy and others that promote compact mixed-use development. Policy B2.3: Encourage a range of uses in the Town Center, including retail, offices, hotels, recreation, tourism, and entertainment. Staff Response: While there are an existing range of uses in the Town Core, this site functions as an anchor to Main Street. Staff's preference would be to create an entertainment or retail anchor to support the types of densities being proposed and to create a mixed type of lodging project consistent with the existing approval and the Town master plan documents for the Town Core. The physical format and nature of this space is equally important to the dimensional requirements. 2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, the sub -area design recommendations and design guidelines of the Town. Staff Response: The massing of the proposed buildings (Phase 1C and 1D), in staff's opinion, minimizes the appearance of stepping the structure down in mass towards the mall area, particularly considering that the original approval proposed a scaled model that evidenced a hotel of significantly different (smaller) scale than the balance of the project. The proposal appears to stand-alone and creates a barrier to the future "public spaces" located along the mall- a concern noted several times during deliberations on the original approvals. Special attention should be given to the height, width, and length of the proposed structures to maximize the comfort to users of both Lot C and Main Street. We feel this could be achieved by stepping -down the massing further and providing detail at the ground level to enhance and activate the pedestrian areas. 3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation. Staff Response: The Town plays a critical role by establishing a framework for development, then evaluating individual development proposals against that pattern. This framework, articulated through the Town Comprehensive Plan, Town Center Implementation Plan, and the Town Design Guidelines, gives current and potential property and business owners a reasonable set of expectations upon which they can base investment decisions, and some assurance that development approvals on adjacent properties will be made using the same set of criteria. Because development in a downtown is so interdependent with surrounding development, having and adhering to this framework is especially important. Staff believes that compatibility with surrounding uses, especially Main Street, is further limited rather than enhanced as proposed in this application- providing material benefit to the applicant and not compatibility to the immediate environment. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-40:10 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision 'August 2°d, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 12 of Uses, activity, and density which provice a relationship with surrounding uses and activity. Staff Response: The currently approved uses (hotel and restaurant) and densities appear to be more appropriate uses within the project and those uses the Town would expect to be developed along Main Street. Further, the significant delay in phasing of the project may not provide a workable and efficient build out pattern for this particular area. 5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed. Staff Response: There appear to be no natural or geologic hazards that affect the property. 6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. Staff Response: Both the site plan and model submitted illustrate the staff concerns noted in the report regarding the barriers the proposed building designs present to pedestrian circulation. Other than the pedestrian circulation generated form the internal courtyard, the proposed development functions independently from other development, particularly Main Street. We would suggest that the original approval did not provide for the most functional and responsive site plan, and the proposed site plan further exacerbates that condition. 7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town Transportation Plan. Staff Response: The proposed PUD includes primarily underground parking, with limited above ground parking. As proposed, the circulation of vehicular traffic would be accessed off of both Benchmark Road and West Beaver Creek BLVD. The vehicular circulation functions relatively well, but staff has concerns relative to pedestrian circulation for reasons stated above. a. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. Staff Response: A detailed landscape plan is required during the Final Design phase. At that time, staff would be better prepared to discuss whether landscaping is optimized. 9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of future project phases. Staff Response: As proposed, the phasing plan for this project is projected to be extended an additional 4 years until 2011. The proposed phasing plan does not specify or demonstrate that the proposal can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of future project phases. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484030 Fax (070) 949-5749 Lot C PUD, Sheraton Mountain Vista Subdivision August 2v0, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission e meeting 13 Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection. Staff Response: With the exception of water, the proposed PUD would have adequate public facilities. As mentioned previously, the subdivision of the existing 133 time-share units made the existing augmentation plan deficient of water rights for this project. Based on staff's calculation of the proposed PUD amendment, the proposed PUD will increase water rights requirements by approximately 24.72 acre feet above the water rights required to supply the development under the original zoning. The application does not address this deficiency. Therefore, we would ask the applicant to explain how these additional water rights will be provided to the Town for this additional demand. The plans generally conform to the street and streetscape improvement plans developed by the Town, subject to more detailed reviews in conjunction with the Final Design Review process and Building permit review. 11.That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed PUD and in the vicinity of the proposed PUD. Staff Response: Both Benchmark Road and West Beaver Creek Boulevard are operational and under capacity. These are the two primary roads that serve the site, and existing streets and roads appear suitable to carry the amended proposal as they would the existing approval. 12. Development Standards Staff Response: Please reference the application dated May 10, 2005 for a complete listing of standards submitted by the applicant: Proposed Action: Staff is recommending DENIAL of the PUD Amendment Application for Sheraton Mountain Vista, dated May 10, 2005. We will provide a resolution for that action at the second of two hearings on this project. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748- 4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. Res actfully S mitted, Eric Heiddeemmann, AICP Senior Planner Attachments: A. PUD Application dated May 10"', 2005 (reduced plans and outline of proposed amendment) B. Stan Bernstein and Associates letter dated April 21, 2005 C. Copy of existing Lot C PUD Development Standards (4 pages) D. Summary of proceedings from prior PUD amendment. E. Staff correspondence with applicant F. Public comment letter(s) G. Proposed massing model (available at the meeting) Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 9495749 Stan Bernstein and Associates, Inc. Financial Planners and Consultants For Local Governments, Municipal Bond Underwriters, and Real Estate Developers 8400 East Prentice Ave., Penthouse Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 Telephone: 303-409-7611; Fax: 303-409-7612; Email: stanplan@earthlinknet MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Larry Brooks, Town Manager FROM: Stan Bernstein, Amy Bernstein DATE: April 21, 2005 SUBJECT: Comments re: Analysis of Fiscal Impacts of Two Future Develop ment Scenarios of Sheraton Mountain Vista Resort in Avon, Colorado (March 24, 2005) prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers L.L.P. ("PWC") Background PWC prepared an analysis of the fiscal impacts to the Town of Avon ("Town"), of two future development scenarios proposed by Starwood Vacation Ownership, Inc. ("SVO") for the Sheraton Mountain Vista Resort — the Original Scenario and the Modified Scenario. The PWC analysis measures expected revenues from sales and accommodation taxes, property taxes, real estate transfer taxes, and various fees, and expected incremental costs to the Town. The purpose of the analysis is to compare the level of tax revenues less certain costs for each planning scenario. The two financial planning scenarios analyzed are described as follows. In the Original Scenario, 48 vacation ownership units and a 125 -room hotel are completed for occupancy by June 1, 2007. The Original Scenario also includes a 4,800 square foot restaurant and 5,500 square feet of retail space. In the Modified Scenario, 55 interval ownership condominium units are completed for occupancy by June 1, 2007, and 64 interval ownership condominium units are completed for occupancy by June 1, 2011. The Modified Scenario does not include any restaurant or retail space. The two financial planning scenarios are presented as Appendix 1 (the Original Scenario) and Appendix 2 (the Modified Scenario). Both financial planning scenarios are expressed in constant 2004 dollars (i.e., they do not include any inflation). PWC and SVO have developed the key financial planning assumptions based upon experience gathered from the existing Phase I Sheraton Mountain Vista interval ownership project. These key financial planning assumptions include annual occupancy rates, average annual ADR (average daily rates) rates for the rental of interval ownership units, the number of persons occupying interval ownership units, and guest expenditure pattens within the Town that would be subject to the Town's 4% sales tax. These key financial planning assumptions do not appear to be unreasonable to use for financial planning purposes. N Mr. Larry Brooks April 21, 2005 Page ii Incremental General Frrnd Revenue, Expenditure and Fund Balances Appendix 1— Original Development Planning Scenario — indicates at project stabilization annual General Fund deficits -of approximately $44,000. This compares to annual General Fund deficits at project stabilization of approximately $33,000 assuming the Modified Development Planning Scenario as presented in Appendix 2. If the Modified Development is approved, I think it would be appropriate and reasonable to increase the assumed $28.02/weekly interval Recreation Amenities Fee by approximately 13% to $31.66/weekly interval. This modest increase would, on an annual basis, generate an additional $33,500 and would show a break-even General Fund balance at project stabilization. You should also be aware that the annual $44,000 General Fund deficit as presented on Appendix I (Original Development Scenario) is partially caused by the Town only receiving 25% of the Accommodation and Sales Taxes generated from the assumed 125 room hotel through the year 2022. Beginning in 2023 the Town would begin receiving 100% of the Accommodation and Sales Taxes generated from the assumed 125 room hotel and an additional $165,000 annually would be received by the Town's General Fund. Consequently, if the financial planning horizon were to be extended beyond 2020 (as presented on Appendix 1), beginning in 2023 the Town's annual General'Fund balances would indicate $121,000 (positive instead of negative fund balances of $44,000 as shown on Appendix 1). So, from a long-term perspective the Original Planning Scenario would show annual General Fund balances of approximately $121,000 compared to the annual negative fund balances of $33,000 shown on Appendix 2 for the Modified Planning Scenario. Incremental Real Estate Transfer Tax Revenues Both financial planning scenarios assume that the Town shares Real Estate Transfer Tax ("REIT") revenues from initial'sales (not secondary sales) with SVO. Both scenarios assume that the average price for each interval week is $31,643, which PWC believes to be a reasonable assumption. For the Original Development Scenario, initial sales of approximately 2,496 interval weeks (48 units multiplied by 52 weeks) would generate 2% RETT revenues of approximately $1,580,000 ($79 million in gross sales) with approximately $790,000 retained by the Town and $790,000 shared with SVO. Secondary RETT revenues (entire 2% retained by the Town) are estimated to be approximately $79,000 annually at project stabilization assuming a 5% annual resale rate. Mr. Larry Brooks April 21, 2005 Page iii Incremental Real Estate Transfer Tax Revenues For the Modified Development Scenario, initial sales of approximately 6,188 interval weeks (55 phase 1 units and 64 phase 2 units multiplied by 52 weeks) would generate 2% RETT revenues of approximately $3,916,000 with $1,958,000 retained by the Town and $1,958,000 shared with SVO. Secondary RETT revenues (entire 2% retained by the Town) are estimated to be approximately $196,000 annually at project stabilization based upon a 5% annual resale rate. It is my understanding that the Town has retained in a special escrow account, approximately $1.5 million of RETT revenues collected from interval week sales from Phase 1 of the Sheraton Mountain Vista Resort. It is my understanding that in accordance with the initial development agreement with SVO, these $1.5 million of RETT revenue collections are only payable to SVO if a 125 room hotel is constructed (i.e., the Original Development Scenario). Consequently, if I understand this agreement correctly, in the event that the Modified Development Scenario is approved, the Town would retain these $1.5 million of RETTrevenues. A key policy decision that the Town Council needs to wrestle with is what percentage, if any, of RETT revenues should be shared with SVO? And, if RETT revenue are shared with SVO, how will SVO use these revenues? Under the Modified Development Scenario approximately $1,958,000 of RETT revenues would be shared with SVO or the Mountain Vista Metro District to offset parking related construction costs. Considering that SVO is anticipating gross sales revenues of approximately $196 million from the sale of interval ownership weeks if the Modified Development Scenario is approved, compared to only $79 million from interval ownership sales based upon the Original (currently approved) Development Scenario, perhaps approval of the Modified Scenario is sufficiently generous and additional sharing of any of the RETT revenues is overly generous. The developers of the Confluence are not proposing any sharing of RETT revenues with the Town. Another factor that should be considered by the Town Council, is that the SVO project will be competing with the proposed Confluence project which also includes 132 interval ownership units (6,864 weeks) in what could be perceived as being in a better location. Impact Fees The Original Development Scenario would generate approximately $582,000 of one-time Water Tap Fees for the Town, compared to $952,000 assuming the Modified Development Scenario. The Original Development Scenario would generate approximately $365,000 of one-time Construction Permit Fees, compared to $455,000 assuming the Modified Development Scenario. Water rights°that would have to be purchased by the developer for the modified scenario are not included in this report. Mr. Larry Brooks April 21, 2005 Page iv Mountain Vista Metropolitan District Impacts Assessed valuation generated from the Original Development Scenario is estimated to $3,443,605 at project stabilization compared to $2,590,653 for the Modified Development Scenario. This loss of approximately $850,000 of assessed valuation represents a loss of approximately $382,500 annually of property tax revenues assuming a 45 mill levy for Mountain Vista Metropolitan District.. It is my understanding that these property tax revenues are supposed to be transferred to Avon Station/Confluence Metropolitan Districts and used to help finance regional improvements including a conference center and perhaps a gondola system. Annual Guest Nights Annual incremental guest nights generated from the Modified Development Scenario are estimated to he approximately 163,000 compared to 109,000 for the Original Development Scenario. Other Key Assumptions Other Key Assumptions include: • Hotel Guest Expenditures per Day Subject to Town 4% Sales Tax $26 • Interval Guest/Owner Expenditures per Day Subject to Town Sales Tax $22 Interval Owners Annual Occupancy Rate of 80% with 4.5 Persons Occupying Each Week Interval Rentals Annual Occupancy Rate of 10% of Owner Weeks with 4.0 Persons Occupying Each Week at an ADR of $260. Hotel Annual Occupancy Rate of 55% with an ADR of $110 and 1.7 Persons Occupying Each Hotel Room. No Gondola is Assumed; Ski Season and Non -Ski Season Bus Operating Costs Based Upon Incremental Guest Nights and Required Incremental New Buses and Hourly Operating Rate of $47 per Hour. Please call with any thoughts, comments or questions. We will be glad to discuss this memorandum with the Town Council at the April 26 Town Council Work Session. Stan Bernstein and Associates, Inc. Financial Planners and Consultants For Local Governments, Municipal Bond Underwriters, and Real Estate Developers 8400 East Prentice Avenue, Penthouse Greenwood Village, Colorado 80111 Telephone: 303-409-7611, Fax: 303-409-7612, Email: stanplan@earthlinknet July 5, 2005 Ms. Heather Smith McGill, Starwood Vacation Ownership, Inc. CC: Town of Avon (Mr. Larry Brooks, Mr. Scott Wright) (SENT VIA EMAIL) Re: Review of draft Sheraton Mountain Vista Fiscal Impact Analysis dated March 24, 2005 prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers L.L.P Dear Heather: Stan Bernstein and Associates, Inc. has reviewed the Sheraton Mountain Vista Fiscal Impact Analysis dated March 24, 2005 that was prepared by PricewaterhouseCoopers L.L.P. We believe that all of our comments and suggestions stated in our February 10, 2005 letter to you have been addressed, and the assumptions and conclusions contained in the March 24, 2005 report appear to be reasonable to us to use for financial planning purposes. Very truly yours, Stan Bernstein, President STAN BERNSTEIN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ZONING A. ALLOWED USES: THE FOLLOWING USES SHALL BE PERMITTED IN THIS LOT C DEVELOPMENT AND THOSE DESIGNATED WITH AD SMALL ALSO BE ALLOWED AT PLAZA/GROUND LEVEL, THOSE USES NOT DESIGNATED WITH ALJ SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED AT PLAZA/GROUND LEVEL: I..f-1 RETAIL STORES 20 SPECIALTY SHOPS 30 RESTAURANTS, EXCLUDING DRIVE-THROUGH WINDOWS 4J_ 7 COCKTAIL LOUNGES 50 PERSONAL SERVICE SHOPS 60 PROFESSIONAL OFFICES 7F.] HOTELS 8 -1 LODGES 4. APARTMENTS 10. CONDOMINIUMS I li J INDOOR RECREATION AND/OR ENTERTAINMENT FACILITIES 120 FINANCIAL INSTITUONS 13. BED AND BREAKFAST LODGE 14. TIME-SHARE, INTERVAL OWNERSIRP, AND FRACTIONAL FEE OWNERSHIP PROJECTS 1.5.-0 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION FACILM. -S 16.El PUBLIC PARKING FACILITIES 17.10 ABOVE GROUND PUBLIC UTILITY INSTALLATIONS 18. ADDITIONAL USES DETERMINED TO BE SIMILAR TO ALLOWED USES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTENT OF THIS ZONE DISTRICT, TO BE APPROVED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR. B. SPECIAL REVIEW .__._.ES: 1.) SIDEWALK CAFES AND OTHER OUTDOOR SEATING AREAS 2) MERCHANT TEMPORARY DISPLAYS G. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 1.) LOT AREA 3.24 ACRES (141,040 SF) MAXIMUM SITE COVERAGE 2.27 ACRES (98,728 SF) = 70% PROPOSED SITE COVERAGE: 1.78 ACRES (77,537 SF) = 55% LANDSCAPED AREA: 20% EXISTING ZONING: PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT EXISTING USES: VACANT 2.) BUILDING SETBACKS NORTH (BENCHMARK ROAD) - TWENTY FEET (20') EAST (WEST BEAVER CREEK ROAD) - TEN FEET (10') SOUTH - TEN FEET (10') WEST (BENCHMARK ROAD) - FIVE FEET (5) UNDERGROUND PARKING GARAGE - EIGHT FEET (8') BALCONIES, PORTE-COCHERES "ROOF OVERHANGS, AWNINGS, AND LOW LEVEL ROOF STRUCTURES COVERING OPEN AIR PEDESTRTAN WAYS MAY ENCROACH INTO ALL SETBACKS NOT MORE THAN 10I . 3.) BUILDII`TG HEIGHT MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 1.00.0' ELEVATOR EQUIPMENT ROOFS SHALL BE NO HIGHER THAN 103.0'. USES MAXIMUM ALLOWED DENSITY: 210 DWELLING UNITS QAX. OF 133 TIMESHARE UNITS X 1 DU/ UNIT = 133.00 DWELLING UNITS not more than 133 two-bedroom time-share units, each of which may be subdivided nto one one -bedroom dwelling unit and one one -bedroom accomodation unit for a total )f 266 condominium units. For zoning density purposes each two-bedroom time-share mit will be one dwelling unit. However, each dwelling unit and accomodation unit shall ie considered a separate time-share unit which may be separately conveyed, occupied, rented )r exchanged. Subdivision of time-share units shall be accomplished by the condominium ieclarabon and map for the project) A HOTEL OF NO LESS THAN 125 HOTEL 41.66 DWELLING UMTS ROOMS X .33DU/ UNIT = 174.66 DWELLING UNITS 20 EMPLOYEE HOUSING UNITS (20 dwelling units of deed restricted employee housing (the "Employee Units") including eight studios, eight one -bedroom, two two-bedroom and two three-bedroom units totaling no less than 26 bedrooms). MINIMUM 31,850 SF GLFA RETAIL OFFICE COMMERCIAL INCLUDING 21,350 SF GLFA GROUND LEVEL COMMERCIAL RETAIL AND 10,500 SF GLFA SECOND AND THIRD LEVEL COMMERCIAL OFFICE/ RETAIL. 5.) PARKING PARKING SHALL INCLUDE 374 PARKING SPACES UPON COMPLETION OF THE ENTIRE TRACT C PROTECT WITH A MA)[IMUM OF 30% OF STRUCTURED PARKING TO BE COMPACT. PHASING THE PHASING OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS: PHASE 1-A: 50 TIME-SHARE UNITS AND 5,800 SF GLFA OF GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIALSPACE FRONTING WEST BEAVER CREEK BOULEVARD AND THE INTERNAL PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO THE AVON TOWN CENTER MALL AND THE EMPLOYEE UMTS. 2,050 SF GLFA OF SUCH RETAIL SPACE MAY BE USED FOR LOBBY, CHECK-IN AND SUPPPORT FUNCTIONS FOR THE TIME-SHARE UNITS UNTIL PHASE 1-B IS COMPLETED. PARKING WILL INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF 180 SPACES. PHASE I -B: 35 TIME-SUARr 'NITS. A BUILDING PERMIT "ILL .BE ISSUED FOR PHASE 1-:lI (the second phase of the Timeshare portion of the prn, ,:t) AT SUCH TIME AS .-\'BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR TME 15,550 SF GLFA THREE STORY EESTANDING COMMERCIAL BUILDING CLOSEST TO THE SEASONS BUILDING (at least 5,250 sf GLFA on the ground level will be retail use and 10,500 sf GLFA the second and third floors will he office retail). PARKING WILL INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF 1 l SPACES. PHASE I -C:48 TIMESHARE UNITS. A BUILDING PERMIT WILL BE ISSUED FOR PHASE I -C (the third phase of the Timeshare portion of the project) AT SUCH TIME AS THE BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSUED FOR THE HOTEL (which shall include a minimum of 5,500 sf GLFA ground -level commercial area suitable for retail use) AND 4,800 SF GLFA OF RESTAURANT SPACE IN THE HOTEL. PARKING WILL INCLUDE CONSTRUCTION OF 183 SPACES. 6.) r,ENERAL NOTES 1. THIS SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL DEFINE THE USES, LOCATIONS, SCALE, AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF LOT C. SNOW REMOVAL TO AN OFF SITE LOCATION WILT. BE REQUIRED. 3. THE AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONFLUENCE AND TRACT C AND/OR THE TO'%N N OF AVON CODES SHALL BE USED FOR ANY PROVISION NOT ADDRESSED IN THE APPROVED SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLANT. 4. THE ARCHITECTURAL AND CIVIL DESIGNS DEPICTED LNT THIS SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY, FINAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, BL'IL.D NG COLOR, MATERIALS, FENESTRATION, TRIM, AND THEME WILL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED THROUGH THE DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS. Approval of this plan constitutes a vest property right pursuant to Article 68 of Title 24, C.R.S., as amended. I `�iclf�tb i k Town of Avon Lt tl PUD Staff Report December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date December 16, 1999 Project type Mixed -Use Planned Unit Development (PUD) Legal description Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision Address 160 W. Beaver Creek Boulevard Current Zoning Planned Unit Development (PUD) Introduction Vistana, Inc. is applying for Final PUD Development Plan approval (and modification of the PUD Development Standards) for a mixed-use development on Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision. The proposed Development plan includes 140 timeshare condominium units, 130 hotel rooms, a restaurant, retail space and 20 employee housing units. Four phases of development are proposed, the first three of which are almost entirely timeshare condominiums. Background Vistana is under contract to purchase Lot C from the current owner, Vail Resorts, Inc. In October 1998, Town Council approved a zone change, from Town Center (TC) to Planned Unit Development (PUD), and approved the PUD Development Standards for Lot C via Ordinance 98-21. At the applicant's request (then Vail Resorts, Inc.), that approval did not include a Final Development Plan. The application currently before the Town is for Final PUD Development Plan approval, which is governed by Section 17.20.110 of the Avon Municipal Code. The Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed this application on November 2, November 7 and November 16. Discussion The Development Plan attached to this report is the latest revision, and addresses comments by P&Z and staff from the December 7'h and November 16'b meetings. Also attached for your reference is Staffs letter to the applicant dated December 10's summarizing the Commission and staffs comments. Modifications in the attached plan include: • The angled parking spaces at the West Beaver Creek Boulevard timeshare building entrance are now 90 -degree spaces. • The angle of the driveway and loading area entrance to the parking garage next to Benchmark Road. • The elevator for the employee housing building has is now within the employee lounge area and the fireplaces are deleted. The stairwells are also relocated. • Addition of a turn around area in the surface parking lot next to Benchmark Road. • The footprint of the hotel has been clarified. • The measurement of retail space is now Gross Leaseable Floor Area (GLFA) rather than Gross Floor Area (GFA), for consistency with Town of Avon parking requirements. • Notes on the plan clarify that the architectural design is conceptual and that final architectural design will be approved through the Final Design Review process. Town of Avon Community Development Wnance\cd-publWp&zXstalf reports\1999\122199Votc2ndpudrevlsed1215.doc (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C, Avon Center at Beay. ,;eek Subdivision; PUD Development Plan December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 8 • The traffic study is updated to reflect the revised circulation and access for the site. Please note that the reference to a traffic signal at Sun Road is a typographical error; the data and conclusions in the report do not reflect the presence of a traffic signal. PUD Review Criteria 1. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's Goals and Objectives. The Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Avon Town Council in 1996, includes a number of goals and policies, listed below, which deal directly and indirectly with development in the Town Center. They are based on principles of economically sustainable development that reflect the practical experience of communities throughout the country. Urban design is critical to the long-term economic health of a downtown. The design and arrangement of buildings and their surroundings, together with the associated type and mix of activities (so-called "uses"), has much to do with where people go to shop, dine out, find lodging, or work. Over time, people choose places that are convenient, interesting, safe and comfortable. Successful businesses both help create and are attracted to such places. The Town plays a critical role by establishing a framework for development, then evaluating individual development proposals against that pattern. This framework, articulated through the Comprehensive Plan and Design Guidelines, gives current and potential property and business owners a reasonable set of expectations upon which they can base investment decisions, and some assurance that development approvals on adjacent properties will be made using the same set of criteria. Because development in a downtown is so interdependent with surrounding development, having and adhering to this framework is especially important. The Comprehensive Plan describes the Town Center as being the "most intensely developed part of town, as a true urban environment with attractive public gathering places. New development on vacant parcels, as well as redevelopment of existing uses in the Town Center will include mixed-use buildings containing retail and services on the ground floor, offices and/or residential above, and structured parking and urban amenities such as plazas and walkways. An overall pedestrian network will be developed for the Town Center, to create a truly walkable environment." (Page 42) Relevant Goals and Policies include: Goal A1: Ensure a balanced system of land uses that maintains and enhances Avon's identity as a residential community, and as a regional commercial, tourism and entertainment center. Policy A3.5: Since undeveloped land in the Town Center is scarce, it will be developed at higher density, include a vertically integrated mix of commercial and residential uses, and rely primarily on underground and/or structured parking. Goal B 2: Establish the Town Center Area as an inviting, vibrant and safe pedestrian - oriented cultural, retail and entertainment hub Policy B 2.2: Development and redevelopment in the Town Center should effectively separate vehicles from pedestrian access and circulation. Town of Awn Community Development Wlnancelcd-public\p&Z\$Iafl reports\1999\12219mote2ndpudrovlsed1215.doc 970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C. Avon Center at Beave, ek Subdivision; PUD Development Plan December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Pdge 3 of 2 Policy B 2.3: Encourage a range of uses in the Town Center, including retail, offices, hotels, recreation, tourism, and entertainment. Policy E 1.4: Commercial areas should be designed to minimize in -town vehicle travel by making it easier for people arriving by car to park and conveniently walk to multiple stores and businesses. Policy E 2.2: Structured parking will be incorporated in all development and major redevelopment in the Town Center. The hotel, freestanding office/retail building and minor portions of the timeshare buildings constitute vertically mixed use as described in the Comprehensive Plan (see above). At buildout, the project incorporates structured parking, pedestrian access and a functional connection with the Town Center Mall. Apart from the proposed phasing and some minor modifications, the development as a whole generally conforms to the language and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the Design Guidelines. However, the project is proposed to occur in four phases: Phases IA, 1B and 1C, and Phase 2. Under this scenario, the development will begin with timeshare and employee housing at the corner of Benchmark Road and Beaver Creek Boulevard, and proceed toward the Town Center Mall. The first three phases are almost entirely timeshare condominiums and employee housing. The majority of ground -level retail and the hotel would occur in the last phase (Phase 2). One likely outcome of this phasing plan is a freestanding timeshare building separated from the Town Center Mall. The small amount of retail included with the timeshare building is focused mainly on Beaver Creek Boulevard, and does not interact with storefronts adjacent to the Town Center Mall. Functioning more as a standalone project, the timeshare seems likely to generate more automobile traffic and transit usage than would the more dense, integrated development shown at the end of Phase 2. Without the proximity and density of additional retail space along the Mall in conjunction with the timeshare and hotel, retail business development on the Mall seems less likely. In short, this phasing plan represents a significant departure from the framework expressed by the Comprehensive Plan. Rather than complementing existing and proposed development in the Town Center, the phasing plan could fragment the Town Center and the Town Center Mall. With the continuing business growth of Edwards and the impending start of development in the Village at Avon, this seems to be a step backwards in the overall development of the Town Center. The phasing plan therefore does not conform to the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. A recommended condition of approval is that the project starts with the hotel and retail, or is constructed as a single phase. 2. Conformity and compliance with the overall design theme of the town, the sub -area design recommendations and design guidelines of the Town. The Town Center lies within Subarea 13 of the Urban Design. Plan (p. 65, 1996 Comprehensive Plan). At buildout, the proposed development generally conforms to the overall design theme and sub -area design recommendations. The phasing as proposed, however, does not. The following comments are based upon the buildout. Town of Avon Community Development %Vinancalcd•publktp&zWaff reports\1999\12219Wotc2ndpudrevised1215.doc 970) 7484030 Fax (970) 949.5749 K Lot C, Avon Center at Beay. :eek Subdivision; PUD Development Plan December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 8 • The two story retail building steps back from the Town Center Mall as recommended. • The plaza design ties the project to the mall. A pedestrian connection has been provided from the Mall back to the fountain area. • The Guidelines call for pedestrian connections through the property. Pedestrian connections have been provided both through the interior of the project and on the perimeter_ • The design of the sidewalks, pedestrian ways and streetscape will be refined through the design review process. 3. Design compatibility with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation. • Staff's understanding of the architectural design is that it is presented to illustrate a variety of concepts. Consequently, the architectural theme is not consistent throughout the project. A note has been placed on the plans that states that the architectural plans are conceptual only and that the final architectural design, including the architectural theme, will be approved separately through the design review process. 4. Uses, activity, and density provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity. • At buildout, the uses, density and activity level will achieve conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and Downtown Design Guidelines when Phase 2, the final phase of the development, has been completed with the attendant retail space and pedestrian facilities. • The circulation system now works in conjunction with the Lot B project, with some refinement at the Design Review stage. • As proposed, Phases 1A, 1B and 1C do not meet this criterion. 5. Identification and mitigation or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property upon which the PUD is proposed. No significant hazards have been identified. 6. Site plan, building design and location and open space provisions designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. • As discussed above, the building design will be refined at the Design Review process. This will include that building elevations are consistent with the floor plans. • The provision of the interior pedestrian ways and adjacent retail, and the connection to the mall will contribute to the functionality of Avon's Town Center. The interior corridor may help to preserve mountain views from Beaver Creek Boulevard. 7. A circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation that Is compatible with the town transportation plan. Tam of Avon Community Development \Vlnance\cd-pub11cW stat) reports\1999\122199Uotc2ndpudrovisedl215.doc 970) 749.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C, Avon Center at BeaVL eek Subdivision; PAD Development Plan December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of -8 A functional circulation system can be created with further refinement of the access to the project and the design of the loading and trash areas. We have included recommended conditions of approval to address these concerns. 8. Functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space in order to optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function. The landscaping appears functional for an urban development. Any phasing will be approved in conjunction with the final design review process. 9. Phasing plan or subdivision plan that will maintain a workable, functional, and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plan shall clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficlent without relying upon completion of future project phases. Please see comments regarding phasing under criteria number 1, 2, 4 and 7. The phasing plan as proposed is not, in staffs opinion, acceptable under this criterion. 10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection. • Proposed storm water detention and pollution control facilities are located on Town of Avon property, Tract G. This will require execution of an agreement with the Town prior to final approval to address issues related to this use of the property, construction and maintenance of the facilities and their relocation if required for future development of the area. • The plans generally conform to the street and streetscape improvement plans developed by the Town, subject to more detailed reviews in conjunction with the Final Design Review process and Building permit review. • Proposed grades at south end of site appear to be significantly lower than existing grades of adjacent Town Center Mall. The grading plan will require refinement at the Final Design review and building permit stages. • No concerns regarding sewer, water, or school capacity have been expressed. 11.That the existing streets and roads are suitable and adequate to carry anticipated traffic within the proposed PUD and In the vicinity of the proposed PUD. The provision of the left turn lane for traffic exiting Sun Road helps to reduce the impacts from traffic turning onto West Beaver Creek Boulevard. The updated traffic report is included in your packet. 12. Development Standards The PUD approved in October of 1998 by Town Council established the development standards. Setbacks: This PUD proposes reduced setbacks from the original PUD as follows: • North (Benchmark Road): unchanged • East (West Beaver Creek Road: 20 feet original, 10 feet proposed • South (Sun Road): 10 feet -unchanged Town of Avon Community Development \Vlnancelcd-publk\p&Astaff reports\1999\122199Uotc2ndpudrevisedl215.doc 970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C, Avon Center at Beav, eek Subdivision; PUD Development Plan December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 of 8 • West (Benchmark Road) 10 feet original, 5 feet proposed • Underground narking garage- requesting 8 feet setback. • Other encroachments: The original PUD approved the encroachment of non -habitable structures including Porte cocheres, low level roof structures covering open air pedestrian ways and awnings relating to commercial uses could encroach up to a 10 foot setback. The current PUD has expanded this to include roof overhangs and balconies. Staff does not object to the additional items encroaching. The PUD must specify that these elements are limited to non -habitable encroachments. Height: The plans conform to the 100 -foot height limit imposed by the original PUD. This will be verified with the final design review and building permit plans. Density: The project conforms to the 210 dwelling density established by the original PUD. It must be noted that the two-bedroom timeshare units are configured as one bedroom lock - offs including a living room and a bedroom for each side. We have enclosed a letter from Brett Miller of OZ Architecture dated November 3rd stating that these units meet the Town's definition of a dwelling unit, which allows up to two lock -offs. The cooking facilities have been removed from the lock -off side to meet this definition. In staffs opinion, the subdivision of the timeshares into one -bedroom units must be prohibited; otherwise the lock -off units function as separate units and must be classified as such. The applicants should further clarify how these units will function, including whether they will allow separate rentals and "space banking" of the lock -offs. Site Coverage: 70 percent -unchanged Landscaping 20 percent -conforms to Town Center standards. Parking: • Hotel: 1 parking space per room • Timeshare interval ownership: .6 spaces per bedroom, proposed 1.2 spaces per unit (assumes 2 bedrooms per timeshare unit and two living areas) • Employee housing:.5 spaces per unit -unchanged. • Compact spaces: proposed 20 percent of structured parking, which is more restrictive than the Town Zoning Code requirements Staff was able to verify 384 of 388 proposed parking spaces. The plans will be required to provide 388 spaces. Snow shedding and storage: A temporary collection area has been provided. The plans indicate that snow will be hauled off- site. The plans need to be refined at the Final Design Review stage to address snow- shedding concerns. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the PUD Final Development Plan, subject to the following conditions: General requirements and limitations: 1. The phasing plan as proposed does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The hotel and retail phase should be constructed with the first phase of development. 2. The two-bedroom time-share units constitute one dwelling unit and may not be further subdivided, sold, transferred, conveyed, leased, or sub -leased separately. Town of Avon Community Development \10nancalcd•publ1c\p&z\sta0 reports\1999\12219911otc2ndpudrevised1215.doc 970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver :k Subdivision; PAD Development Plan December 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 7 of 8 3. A complete landscaping plan and construction laydown plan will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase of the project. 4. A common area with a fireplace is required on each floor of the employee Housing Project. 5. The parking structure will be designed for future access to the Sunroad ramp and Lot B. 6. All parking aisles are required to comply with the 24'0" width. 7. All of the encroachments proposed in the setbacks are non -habitable. The non -habitable encroachments are limited to balconies, porte-cochere, roof overhangs, awnings, and lower level roof structures. Streets and Streetscape: 8. All perimeter sidewalks throughout the project shall be a minimum of 8'0" width. 9. No columns or structural supports may either impede the 8'0" wide sidewalk clearance requirements or encroach into driveways or entrances. 10. All curbs along streets and entrances must include 2'0' gutter pans in addition to the driving lanes. 11. All streetscape improvements will include furniture, fixtures and lights per town standards. 12. All street and streetscape improvements along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and Benchmark Road must be completed at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 13. The final design and specifications for the bus stop will be required at design review. 14. All surface entries and loading entrances shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6'. 15. All parking entrances from public roads shall have a 28'0" access width, which will include a 2'0" gutter pan on each side. 16. The fountain/seating area adjacent to the Town Center Mall must be complete at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 17. The grading plan adjacent to the Town Center Mall is not approved and must be resolved at design review contemporaneous with the streetscape improvement plan with the first phase of development. Required Agreements: 18. A Reciprocal Access Easement Agreement between Lot B and Lot C shall be executed prior to issuance of a building permit and approved by the Town of Avon. The Agreement must contain the following terms and conditions: • A 39'0 access easement at Sunroad i.e, 19'5" on each property. • Reciprocity for access and storage during construction. • This Agreement will also set forth authorization for construction and management of the storm drainage facilities from Lot B. 19. An Agreement will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for the management, design and construction of the storm water detention and pollution control facilities proposed on Town property known as "Tract G, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision". The PUD Development Plan in not an approval for the proposed use of Tract G for storm water and pollution control facilities. Amendments to the PUD Development Plan 20. The PUD Development Plan may be modified by reducing the number of time-share units to accommodate the required parking, additional retail space, employee housing, or hotel units without requiring a PUD Amendment. Town of Avon Community Development \Ulnancelcd-publep&Astaff reports119Ml22199Uotc2ndpudrevlsedl2l5.doc 970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 . Lot C, Avon Center at BeavL eek Subdivision; PUD Development Plan Decbmber 21, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 8 of 8 Final Design Review: 21. The accessibility and function of the trash and delivery areas is not approved. All aspects of the trash and delivery areas will be resolved and clarified at Design Review. 22. The architecture, construction details, final grading and drainage plans depicted in the PUD Development Plan are conceptual only. A separate process is required for refining and resolving the details for the project. Recommended Motion "I move to adopt Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution 99-18 recommending approval of the Lot C PUD Development plan with conditions." If you have any questions regarding this project or anything in this report, please call me at 748- 4002, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, Karen Griffith, AICP Town Planner Attachments: • P&Z Resolution 99-18 • Revised Development Plan received December 15. • December 10, 1999 letter from Mike Matzko to Oz Architecture Town of Awn Community Development %1Jinancelcd-pub11cV zlstan reports\19991122199Votc2ndpudrevisedl215.doc 970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-18 SERIES OF 1999 A RESOLUTION RECOMNMNDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE 98-21, LOT C, AVON CENTER AT BEAVER CREEK SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO WBEREAS, Vail Associates Investments Inc., owner of the Lot C, has applied for approval of a Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD) and Amended PUD Development Standards, as stipulated in Title 17 of the Avon Municipal Code; and WBEREAS, a public hearing has been held by the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon, pursuant to notices required by law, 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 Zoning and Development Plan application; and WBEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission has reviewed and evaluated the Development Plan according to the criteria Section 17.20.110, subsections'H and I, of the Avon Municipal Code; and WBEREAS, upon satisfaction of the Planned Development Plan the Conditions herein including execution of an acceptable Development Agreement by the Town 1\FINANCE CD•PUBLCIP&Z\Raolutious\Rcs—q 99.18lotckdoc Council of the Town of Avon, the Planning & Zoning Commission finds that: 1. The density, land uses and overall pattern of development conform to the Avon Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives. 2. The PUD Development Plan and Development Standards conform to the overall design theme of the town, the Subarea design recommendations and design guidelines; 3. The PUD Development Plan and Development Standards are compatible with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation; 4. The PUD Development Plan and Development Standards propose a mix of uses, activity, and density which provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity; 5. The PUD Development Plan will identify and propose any necessary mitigation and/or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property; 6. The development as represented by the PUD Development Plan and Development Standards appear to be designed to produce a functional development responsive and•sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community; 7. The project will incorporate a circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation that is compatible with the town transportation plan and proposed downtown plan; 8. The PUD Development Plan and development standards propose functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space, and the PUD Development Plan will optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function; 9. Phasing plans maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plans clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of \TNANCECD-P isuC�PeZa=iuuons\xxcs_9mv9-tBIMR.d« future project phases based on the execution of an acceptable development agreement and ordinance conditions; 10. There are, or will be as needed, adequate public services including sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads; parks, and police and fire protection; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado to approve the PUD Development Plan and amended development standards as depicted in Exhibit A, entitled Lot C Avon, Colorado PUD Development Plan dated December 14, 1999 as follows: a. Reducing the West Beaver Creek building Setback from 20 feet to 10 feet, reducing Benchmark Road building setback from 10 feet to 5 five feet, the establishment of an 8 foot underground parking setback. b. Allowance of non -habitable encroachments into the 10 -foot setbacks. c. An exemption for 20 employee housing units from the maximum allowed density of 210 dwelling units, subject to the following conditions: I. General requirements and limitations: The phasing plan as proposed does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The hotel and retail phase should be constructed with the first phase of development. 2. The two-bedroom time-share units constitute one dwelling unit and may not be further subdivided, sold, transferred, conveyed, leased, or sub- leased separately. 3. A complete landscaping plan and construction laydown plan will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase of the project. 4. A common area with a fireplace is required on each floor of the employee Housing Project. NTNANCBCQPUBLILV&Z\Resolutioos\Res99\99.1 SlotcR.doc 5. The parking structure will be designed for future access to the Sunroad ramp and Lot B. 6. All parking aisles are required to comply with the 24'0" width. 7. All of the encroachments proposed in the setbacks are non -habitable. The non -habitable encroachments are limited to balconies, porte-cochere, roof overhangs, awnings, and lower level roof structures. II. Streets and Streetscape: 8. All perimeter sidewalks throughout the project shall be a minimum of 8'0" width. 9. No columns or structural supports may either impede the 8'0" wide sidewalk clearance requirements or encroach into driveways or entrances. 10. All streetscape improvements will include furniture, fixtures and lights per town standards. 11. All street and streetscape improvements along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and Benchmark Road must be completed at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 12. The final design and specifications for the bus stop will be required at design review. 13. All surface entries and loading entrances shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6'. 14. All parking entrances from public roads shall have a 28'0" access width, -which will include a 2'0" gutter pan on each side. 15. The fountain/seating area adjacent to the Town Center Mall must be complete at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 16. The grading plan adjacent to the Town Center Mall is not approved and must be resolved at design review contemporaneous with the streetscape improvement plan with the first phase of development. \*INANCE\CD-PUB LM&Z\Resolutim\Rcs_99\99- I B lotc R.doc III. Required Agreements: 17. A Reciprocal Access Easement Agreement between Lot B and Lot C shall be executed prior to issuance of a building permit and approved by the Town of Avon. The Agreement must contain the following terms and conditions: i. A 39'0 access easement at Sunroad Le, 19'5" on each property. ii. Reciprocity for access and storage during construction. iii. This Agreement will also set forth authorization for construction and management of the storm drainage facilities from Lot B. 18. An Agreement will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for the management, design and construction of the storm water detention and pollution control facilities proposed on Town property known as "Tract G, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision". The PUD Development Plan in not an approval for the proposed use of Tract G for storm water and pollution control facilities. IV. Amendments to the PUD Development Plan: 19. The PUD Development Plan may be modified by reducing the number of time-share units to accommodate the required parking, additional retail space, employee housing, or hotel units without requiring a PUD Amendment. V. Final Design Review: 20. The accessibility and function of the trash and delivery areas is not approved. All aspects of the trash and delivery areas will be resolved and clarified at Design Review. 21. The architecture, construction details, final grading and drainage plans depicted in the PUD Development Plan are conceptual only. A separate process is required for refining and resolving the details for the project. \\FINANCMD-PUBUW&2\Rmlutim\Rm_99\99-1swkR.dm ADOPTED THIS 21" DAY OF DECEMBER, 1999 Signed: Chris Evans, Chair Arrest: Greg Macik, Secretary Date: Date: UPMANCBC0.PUBLILV&ZResoludou\Rcs—M99-18lotcR.doc AVON C O L O R A D O December 10, 1999 Mr. Tom Obermeier OZ Architecture 1580 Lincoln Street Suite 1200 Denver, CO 807.03 Re:, Staff comments on December 66 Revised Plans for this Vistana Pr9ject —Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision, • Dear Tom This letter is a summary of our comments on the revised PUD Development Plan for Lot C that you, provided to us during our meeting at your office m Monday, December 6. These comments iefleM a . joint review by the Town of Avon Community Development, Pngmeamg,'and Administration Department& For your reference, we've attached. out previous. comments dated September 27, October 20, October 28, November 5, November 8, November 12, Novenibet 17 and December 7. If you have. any questions or would like clarification of 'any of these, please don't hesitate to call me. Clarification of plant sheets 1. Streets 3, 4, 5, and 9'do not agree on the hotel building location with respect to the "Sumr&X' ..entrance along the southeast'property line: • Sheet 3 seems to indicate that the exterior walls are offset approximately 8 feet onto the larking structure deck: • Sheet 5 seems to show walls overlapping approximately 6 feet on to the sidewalk shown on Sheet 3; • Sheet 9 seems to show columns and building extending over the sidewalk and approximately 8 feet into "Sunmae entrance as shown on Sheet 3. . Vehlcle A== and Circulation i 1. The shared access easement between Lot B and Lot C (the "Sur aroad" access) should be at least 39 feet wide, back of curb to back of curb, to fully encompass access improvements from Beaver Creek Boulevard to site access locations. 2. The prriposed enhance to Lot B shown on Sheet C4 should be located at least as far back into the site as the hotel lobby entrance. ' 3. The hotel surface parking area shown on earlier versions has been eliminated, but the Phase IA plan does not appear to accommodate the turning around and exiting movements of larger vehicles. Post Office Box 975 A temporary tum amumd or drive through must be provided in phase IA 400 Benchmark Road Avon, Colorado 81610 970-748-4000 970-949-9139 Fax 970-845-7708 rN Letter to Tom Obermeler December 10, 1999 Page 2 of 4 4. The revised Development Plan includes a new entrance to the parking structure via Benchmark Road as we requested, but no longer includes an entrance from "Sunroad." • A "break through" wall should be provided in the un&rgrotmd parking for future access to the Suaroad ramp and Lot B. • The main Benchmark Road garage entry should be revised to maintain ninety -degree access to and from Benchmark Road, and to eliminate the angle entrance from the south. It should also include a 2 -foot gutter pan on each side for a minimum width of 28 feet from face of curb to face of curb. • Accessibility and function of the Benchmark Road delivery entry and loading dock design must be verified. Access and maneuvering should not encroach an 2 -foot gutter pans, and should allow adequate space for clearance around dumpsters and truck ®moss, Maneuvering and backing in the street will not be acceptable. • The Traffic Study must be updated to reflect the mipacts of the timeshare entrance on West Beaver Creek Boulevard becoming a major entrance and the "Sumoad" entrance being reduced to secondary status 5. The heated driveway entrance from Benchmark Road to the surface parking area does not appear to meet minimum width requirements including curb and gutter. The width should be 28 feet from face of curb to face of curb. 6. A minimum vertical clearance of 13' W is required for fire truck access at the hotel and timeshare vehicle entrances. 7. The circulation in the surface lot accessed via Benchmark Road is awkward; cars may have to back out if they do not find a space. We recommend deleting 2 or more parking spaces to create an exit lace. 8. The parking aisles on sheet 4 are dimensioned at Tri feet, but scale to 22 feet 9. As proposed on Sleet 3, the service area adjacent to the timeshare building may be inadequate to accommodate standard loading space requirements and trash service vehicles. 10. Access from the elevator nearest the Benchmark Road loading area appears to access a lawn area at the lobby level, and to be blacked by the "seating wall." Sklewdk and Shtetw" llttprovetttent3 1. Streetscape improvements should include sidewalk, furniture, fixtures and lights per Town standards. 2 Streetscape improvements along Beaver Creek Boulevard and Benchmark Road should include sidewalk of a minimum width of 8 feet Ten feet is recommended where the sidewalk is adjacent to buildings 3. Phase IA improvements should include all streetscape improvements including sidewalk along Beaver Creek Boulevard and Benchmark Road for the entire length of the project, plus a connection to the proposed fountain area adjacent to the Town Center Mall. Letter to Tom Obermeier December 10,1999 Page 3 of 4 4. The proposed location of the employee housing building does not appear to leave adequate space for an acceptable sidewalk width along Benchmark Road. Reversing the location of the stairs and elevator at the south end of the building might reduce this problem. 5. Ail curbs along streets and entrances must include 2 foot gutter pan in addition to driving lanes. Phasing 1. As we have discussed, and as pointed out by the Planning & Zoning Commission at their -December 7 meeting, Phases 1A, 1B and 1C do not appear to conform to the Comprehensive Plan, which prescribes a vertical mix of uses and pedestrian facilities. Most of the retail development and pedestrian facilities would not occur until the Phase 2 of the project. We anticipate that phasing will be a significant issue in Council's review of the proposed Development Plan. 2. Rather than require detailed landscape plans for each phase as part of this application, we agree that final landscaping and construction staging may be reviewed through Final Design Review for each 1 3. Consider relocating the temporary path between Beaver Creek Boulevard and the Town Center Mall to bmw conform to existing topography. Gramng and Drainage The revised Development Plan generally addresses drainage issues raised in previous reviews. However, an updated drainage repast and construction details will be required at time of application for building permit. 1. Grading Drainage Plans have been revised to work with existing conditions on Lot B. However, the proposed construction does extend onto W B and will require written approval from the- property heproperty owner prior to issuance of any construction permit. 2. Stam drainage facilities are redesigned to eliminate all facilities on Lot B except for inlets and cog piping to provide drainage for the existing Lot B parking areas. Construction of these facilities will also require written approval from the property owner prior to issuance of construction permit 3. The proposed grades at the south end of the site appear to be significantly lower than the existing grades of the adjacent Town Center Mall. 4. Proposed storm water detention and pollution control facilities ate located on Town of Avon property (the small parking lot on Tract G). This will require execution of a separate agreement with the Town, as a condition of Final PUD Development Plan approval, to add [ess issues related to this use of the property, construction and maintenance of the facilities, and their relocation if requited for future development of the property. Architectmal Design 1. As we have discussed, PUD Development Pian approval does not include Final Design approval. The architecture will be refined and approved through a separate Design Review process. 2. Our understanding is that the architecture presented in the plan set is to illustrate a variety of concepts. Consequently, the architectural theme is not consistent throughout the projecL To avoid confusion, please add the following ante to all sheets with building elevations, plus the cover sheet: k t Letter to Tom Oberneler December 10, 1999 Page 4 014 'The architectural designs depleted in this PUD Development Plan are conceptual only. Fhal architect" design including, but not limited to, building color, materials, fenestration, trim, and theme will be determined by the Planning & Zoning Commisslon through a separate Design Review process Pafldng 1. Parking space requirements in previous versions of tLc Development Plan were based on Gross Floor Area (GFA). The revised Development Plan uses net floor area calculated as 80 percent of GFA. As we discussed, Avon's requirements are based on Gross Leaseable Floor Area (GLFA). Please revise your calculations accordingly. 2. The original plan sets appeared to include the restaurant space in the area calculations of retail and office use. However, it is not clear that the revised plan includes the restaurant seating area in the areacalculation. 3. Our count shows 386 parking spaces. We were notable to find 388 spaces as noted on the plan. Miscellaneous Comments The building height is now within the 100 -foot maximum To avoid confusion, please remove the maximum topographical elevation from the plan sheet and insert the statement that the maximum building height allowed is 100 feet. Conclusion We tope you find these comments helpful, and appreciate your efforts to address our comments thus far. If you have any questions or would like to discuss any of these comments further, please call me at 748.4014. We look forward to receiving the revised plans by 8 AM Wednesday, December 15, so that your project can remain on the agenda for the December 21 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting. Sincerely, Matzko of Community Cc: Mayor and Town Cotmcil Planning & Zoning Commission Bill P.fting, Town Manager Lary Brooks, Assistant Town Manager Norm Wood, Town Fagmeer Ruth Bare, Assistant Director of Community Development Karen Griffith, Town Planner Burt Levin, Town Attorney a 0 Z A R L I T E C T U R E" December 15, 1999 Mike Matzko Director of Community Development P. O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 Re: Vistana — Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision Staff Comments on December 10, 1999 Dear Mdce: Thank you for forwarding your staff comments on the revised PUD Development Plan for Lot C that we provided to you at the December 6,1999 meeting at our Denver office. We have addressed these issues and the following changes have been made to the plans. Clarification of Plan Sheets 1. Sheets 3, 4 , 5 and 9 consistently locate the hotel building relative to the southeast property line. Vehicle Access and Circulation 1. The back of curb to back of curb dimension for access across from Sun Road has been established as 39. The shared access easement has remained at 25' to be consistent with the previously approved PUD for Lot B. 2. Sheet C4 has been revised to locate the entrance to Lot B to reflect the location approved in Lot B's PUD. 3. The Phase IA tum around has been revised to allow for turning and exiting movements of large vehicles. 4. It has been noted that a break through wall should be constructed to allow for potential garage access to the "Sun Road" ramp. In addition, the garage entry from Benchmark Road has been revised to maintain ninety degree access and a 28' width from face of curb to face of curb. Our traffic engineer has provided an updated traffic report which includes a turning radius diagram for the service area off of Benchmark Road. 5. The driveway entrance from Benchmark Road has been dimensioned at the required width of 28'. 6. The circulation in the surface parking lot has been revised to facilitate the turning around of cars. 7. The access from the elevator nearest Benchmark Road has been revised. Sidewalk and Streetscape Improvements 1. A note has been added to Sheet 3 indicating that streetscape improvements will conform to Town of Avon standards. 0 E N V E A. 1 9 0 L 0 E A. 3 0 tt N I T C 0 N N T T. C 0 1 0 1 A 9 0 t P 9 1 1 6 3 l 0 Z A R„ H I T E C T U R E' Grading and Drainage 1. The proposed grades at the South end of the site have been revised to better meet the existing grades of the adjacent Town Center Mall. Specifically, the finished floor of the office/retail building has been raised to an elevation within 18" of the adjacent Town Center Mall. This elevation difference will be accommodated in the final grading plan. Architectural Design 1. A note has been added to Sheet 1 and to all sheets containing elevations. The note indicates that the elevations are conceptual and will be reviewed during the Design Review Process. 2 The southern elevation of Phase 1C has been included per the suggestion of the Planning and Zoning'Commission. Parking 1. Sheet 1 has been revised relative to the parking requirements. The parking requirements are now based on Gross Leaseable Floor Area (GLFA) instead of Net Square Footage (NSF). Since the GLFA can only be accurately established from construction drawings, it is estimated that the GLFA will be 80% of the Gross Square Footage. 2. A note has been added to Sheet 1 to clarify the parking requirements of the restaurant. It has been noted that the 1 space per hotel room requirement includes any uses incidental to the hotel. It is our intention that the restaurant be treated as an incidental use to the hotel. The parking requirement for the hotel restaurant described above reflects the language of the previously approved PUD for Lot C- 3. 3. If there is a discrepancy between the parking count established on Sheet 1 and the parking count as described in the drawings, it is understood that the information on Sheet 1 establishes the Development Standards for the project. Building Height 1. To clarify the building height, the topographical maximum has been removed from Sheet I and replaced by a 100' maximum building height designation. The revised plans have been delivered by the time requested on December 15. We look forward to receiving your staff comments for the December 21 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Sincerely, B+rctt 4;t (cr Brett Miller cr' OZ Architecture 0 E 1 9 E 1. B O 9 t 0 E 1. S 0 M M I T 0 9 9 1 T T . r 0 t 9 1 A 0 0 3 P 0 I N G S WV. 4.1999 614EPM November 3,1999 ( 1;RC. DD&M �, tro.Im Mike 114 tem Dram Culf6th Town of Avon Planning P.O. Box 973 Avon, CO 61620 Dear Mike and Kates, Thanks again (Of your aadatance with our Pill) Development Pian for Lot C. We have WWy appzdatBd your timely response to our submittal. P.2/2 I had an opportunity after the meeting to talk with both Larry Doll and Tim McKnight of Viauma about the proposed rue of the dmesharo unit It is Vistana's intention that the smaller "lock -off" unit will be used as an "Aocomodatim unit" u defined in Section 17.08.50 of the Zoning Code of the Town of Avon. It is tocognized that the presence of a kitchen, and in pudcWu "a mans of eking" (Section 17.08A00) diadnmuashes tm accommodatiwi wilt from a dwelling unit. The smaller lock -off" h ch a tpeana of cooking, and should therefore be considered an accommodation unit. Relative to the calculation of density, the two-bedroom lock -off unit is bbeeiiyrlqg considered as one dwelling trait. Ibis is laud in Section 17.08.270 subsection 2 whitEh defitta a dwelling unit as up to "two a000=xdation units in association with a dwelling umtt" Relative to the calculation of the parking requirement for a two-bedroom lack -off, the approved PUD,far Lot C establishes the PVkI0II twjuimment as 0.6 puidng spaces per bedroom. The two-bedroom lock -off would then requim 1.2 pa idnS spats. The above analysis clarifies the issues regarding density and pmjring for the two-bedroom lock -off unit I will call tomorrow to ace if tbore ate any other quesdoas regardmg the standard timealme unit I Sincerely, xBrMMMW OZ Architecture 1 r A 1 9 1 1 T t C 7 1 1 F Planning and Zoning Commission Record of Proceedings December 21, 1999 . The Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission regularly meets at 6:00 p.m. on the first and third Tuesday of each month, in the Avon Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, CO 81620. Meeting agendas are posted at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting in the following locations: Avon Municipal Building lobby; Avon City Market lobby; Avon Recreation Center lobby; Avon/Beaver Creek Transit Center Commission Members Staff Members Ward Morrison Karen Griffith, Town Planner Chris Evans, Chair Beth Salter, Recording Secretary Anne Fehlner, Vice Chair Stephen Hodges, Community Service Officer Paul Klein Mike Matzko, Com. Dev. Director Greg Macik, Secretary Ruth Borne, Assistant Com. Dev. Director Andrew Karow Brian Sipes I. Call to Order Commissioner Fehlner called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. IL Roll Call All Commissioners were present with the exception of Commissioner Evans. III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda Item A and D of the Final Design items will be added to the Consent Agenda. IV. Conflicts of Interest Commissioner Morrison has a conflict of interest with Item C - Final Design. V. Consent Agenda Commissioner Sipes made a motion to approve the December 7, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes and Item A, Avon Town Square Phase I and II — Master Sign Program, 70 & 90 Benchmark Road and Item D. Lot 73/74, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Charter Sports — Sign Application. Commissioner Morrison seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Avon Planning & Zoning Commissfon December2l, 1999 Record of Proceedings, Page 2 or 3 VI. Final Design Review Lot 40, Block 2, Wlldridge Subdivision — 2685 Bear Trap Road Project Type: Exterior Modification Property Owner: Tim Savage Applicant: Tim Savage Commissioner Klein made a motion to approve the exterior siding color modification for Lot 40, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Macik. Commissioner Sipes and Commissioner Karow opposed the motion. The motion passed by a 4 to 2 vote. Lot 4, Wlldridge Acres Address: 2807 Shepherd Ridge Project Type: Remodel to Existing Home Applicant: Bob Matarese All of the Commissioners were concerned with the proposal as submitted and requested additional information to clarify the proposal. The clarifications are to include a site plan and all elevations for the project. The Commissioners further urged the applicant to revise the South elevation. Commissioner Karow made a motion to table the application, Commissioner Sipes seconded the motion. Commissioner Morrison abstained based upon a conflict of interest. The motion passed unanimously. VII. PUD Application — Public Hearing Lot C — Amended PUD Development Plan Project Type: Mixed -Use Development Property Owner: Vistana, Inc Applicant: OZ Architecture Address: 160 W. Beaver Creek Blvd. There are two corrections for the staff report. The applicant is proposing 136 hotel rooms, not 130. There is 29% of structured parking proposed for the compact spaces, not 20%. All of the Commissioners expressed concern with the proposed phasing plan. All of the modifications and revisions, including staff's conditions, were endorsed by the Commissioners. Michelle Paige, manager of Beaver Creek West, requested additional time to review the application. Commissioner Karow reminded her that there is additional time to provide public comment with Avon Town Council. The Planning Commission has posted public notice since November on the Lot C proposal as required by the Avon Municipal Code. i m Planning d Zoning Commission December2l, 1999 Record of Proceedings, Page 3 o10 James McKnight of Vistana, Inc. thanked the Commissioners for their input and support with this project and requested changes to two of staff's conditions. Item I to allow the discretion of council to determine the Phasing plan's compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Item 18 should be revised to an easement from Lot C for the benefit of Lot B and approved by the Town. The applicant also addressed the condition on the restriction of transferring or selling the timeshare,units as one -bedroom units. Commissioner Morrison recommended that Condition 1 in Staff's Report requires the hotel and retail at Phase I. The Commissioners were in favor of amending Condition 18. Commissioner Karow made a motion to approve the conditions for Resolution 99-18 as follows: Amended Development Standards: a. Reducing the West Beaver Creek building setback from 20 feet to 10 feet, reducing Benchmark Road building setback from 10 feet to 5 five feet, the establishment of an 8 foot underground parking setback. b. Allowance of non -habitable encroachments into the 10 -foot setbacks. c. An exemption for 20 employee housing units from the maximum allowed density of 210 dwelling units, subject to the following conditions: General requirements and limitations: 1. The phasing plan as proposed does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The hotel and retail phase should be constructed with Phase 1A. 2. The two-bedroom time-share units constitute one dwelling unit and may not be further subdivided, sold, transferred, conveyed, leased, or sub- leased separately. 3. A complete landscaping plan and construction laydown plan will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase of the project. 4. A common area with a fireplace is required on each floor of the employee Housing Project. 5. The parking structure will be designed for future access to the Sunroad ramp and Lot B. 6. All parking aisles are required to comply with the 24'0" width. 7. All of the encroachments proposed in the setbacks are non -habitable. The non -habitable encroachments are limited to balconies, porte-cochere, roof overhangs, awnings, and lower level roof structures. if. Streets and Streetscape: 8. All perimeter sidewalks throughout the project shall be a minimum of 8'0" width. 9. No columns or structural supports may either impede the 8'0" wide sidewalk clearance requirements or encroach into driveways or entrances. i von Planning d Zoning Commission Oecember21, 1999 Record of Proceedings, Page 4 of 3 10. All curbs along street and entrances must include 2'0" gutter pans in addition to the driving lanes. 11. All streetscape improvements will include furniture, fixtures, and lights per Town standards. 12. All street and streetscape improvements along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and Benchmark Road must be completed at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 13. The final design and specifications for the bus stop will be required at design review. 14. All surface entries and loading entrances shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6'. 15. All parking entrances from public roads shall have a 28'0" access width, which will include a 2'0" gutter pan on each side. 16. The fountain/seating area adjacent to the Town Center Mall must be complete at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 17. The grading plan adjacent to the Town Center Mall is not approved and must be resolved at design review contemporaneous with the streetscape improvement plan with the first phase of development. III. Required Agreements: 18. An Access Easement Agreement by Lot C for the benefit of Lot B executed prior to issuance of a building permit and approved by the Town of Avon. The Agreement must contain the following terms and conditions: i. A 39'0 access easement at Sunroad Le, 19'5" on each property. ii. Reciprocity for access and storage during construction. iii. This Agreement will also set forth authorization for construction and management of the storm drainage facilities from Lot B. 19. An Agreement will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for the management, design and construction of the storm water detention and pollution control facilities proposed on Town property known as "Tract G, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision". The PUD Development Plan in not an approval for the proposed use of Tract G for storm water and pollution control facilities. IV. Amendments to the PUD Development Plan: 20. The PUD Development Plan may be modified by reducing the number of time-share units to accommodate the required parking, additional retail space, employee housing, or hotel units without requiring a PUD Amendment. V. Final Design Review: 21. The accessibility and function of the trash and delivery areas is not approved. All aspects of the trash and delivery areas will be resolved and clarified at Design Review. on Planning S Zoning Commission December2l, 1999 Record of Proceedings, tsage 5 o!13 22. The architecture, construction details, final grading and drainage plans depicted in the PUD Development Plan are conceptual only. A separate process is required for refining and resolving the details for the project. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Sipes and unanimously approved. Adjourn Respectfully Submitted, k4A o Ruth O. Borne, Acting Recording Secretary TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-18 SERIES OF 1999 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING TO THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON APPROVAL OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY ORDINANCE 98-21, LOT C, AVON CENTER AT BEAVER CREEK SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, WHEREAS, Vail Associates Investments Inc., owner of the Lot C, has applied for approval of a Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD) and Amended PUD Development Standards, as stipulated in Title 17 of the Avon Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held by the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon, pursuant to notices required by law, 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 Zoning and Development Plan application; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission has reviewed and evaluated the Development Plan according to the criteria Section 17.20.110, subsections H and I, of the Avon Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, upon satisfaction of the Planned Development Plan the Conditions herein including execution of an acceptable Development Agreement by the Town 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 IN FAP&Z\Reso1ud=%1999 Resa1ufl=\99.181otcR.doc 730844 e5/30/2M13 of IS R 90.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 Eagle CO Council of the Town of Avon, the Planning & Zoning Commission finds that: 1. The density, land uses and overall pattern of development conform to the Avon Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives.. 2. The PUD Development Plan and Development Standards conform to the overall design theme of the town, the Subarea design recommendations and design guidelines; 3. The PUD Development Plan and Development Standards are compatible with the immediate environment, neighborhood, and adjacent properties relative to architectural design, scale, bulk, building height, buffer zones, character, and orientation; 4. The PUD Development Plan and Development Standards propose a mix of uses, activity, and density which provide a compatible, efficient, and workable relationship with surrounding uses and activity; 5. The PUD Development Plan will identify and propose any necessary mitigation and/or avoidance of natural and/or geologic hazards that affect the property; 6. The development as represented by the PUD Development Plan and .Development Standards appear to be designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community; 7. The project will incorporate a circulation system designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off-site traffic circulation that is compatible with the town transportation plan and proposed downtown plan; B. The PUD Development Plan and development standards propose functional and aesthetic landscaping and open space, and the PUD Development Plan will optimize and preserve natural features, recreation, views and function; 9. Phasing plans maintain a workable, functional and efficient relationship throughout the development of the PUD. The phasing plans clearly demonstrate that each phase can be workable, functional and efficient without relying upon completion of 1111111111111111111III 11111111111111111 III HIM III IN 730844 08/30/2000 11:28it 288 Sara Flahar F:1P@Z Reso1udom11999 Rem1udous199-181oteR.doe 14 of 18 R 99.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 Eagle CO future project phases based on the execution of an acceptable development agreement and ordinance conditions; 10. There are, or will be as needed, adequate public services including sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado to approve the PUD Development Plan and amended development standards as depicted in Exhibit A, entitled Lot C Avon, Colorado PUD Development Plan dated December 14, 1999 as follows: a. Reducing the West Beaver Creek building Setback from 20 feet to 10 feet, reducing Benchmark Road building setback from 10 feet to 5 five feet, the establishment of an 8 foot underground parking setback. b. Allowance of non -habitable encroachments into the 10 -foot setbacks. c. An exemption for 20 employee housing units from the maximum allowed density of 210 dwelling units, subject to the following conditions: I. General requirements and limitations: The phasing plan as proposed does not comply with the Comprehensive Plan. The hotel and retail phase should be constructed with Phase 1A. 2. The two-bedroom time-share units constitute one dwelling unit and may not be further subdivided, sold, transferred, conveyed, leased, or sub- leased separately. 3. A complete landscaping plan and construction laydown plan will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for each phase of the project. 4. A common area with a fireplace is required on each floor of the employee Housing Project. 5. The parking structure will be designed for future access to the Sunroad ramp and Lot B. 1111111111 III 111111 III IN F.\P&Z\Rcsdut1om\1999 Resoludoas\99-I81utckdoc 730844 03/38/2000 11125R 289 Sara Fisher 15 of 18 R 00.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 Eagle CO 6. All parking aisles are required to comply with the 24'0" width. 7. All of the encroachments proposed in the setbacks are non -habitable. The non -habitable encroachments are limited to balconies, porte-cochere, roof overhangs, awnings, and lower level roof structures. Ill. Streets and Streetscape: 8. All perimeter sidewalks throughout the project shall be a minimum of 8'0" width. 9. No columns or structural supports may either impede the 8'0" wide sidewalk clearance requirements or encroach into driveways or entrances. 10. All curbs along street and entrances must include 2'0" gutter pans in addition to the driving lanes. it. All streetscape improvements will include furniture, fixtures, and lights per Town standards. 12. All street and streetscape improvements along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and Benchmark Road must be completed at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 13. The final design and specifications for the bus stop will be required at design review. 14. All surface entries and loading entrances shall have a minimum vertical clearance of 13'6'. 15. All parking entrances from public roads shall have a 28'0" access width, which will include a 2'0" gutter pan on each side. 16. The fountain/seating area adjacent to the Town Center Mall must be complete at the time of issuance of the first TCO for the project. 17. The grading plan adjacent to the Town Center Mall is not approved and must be resolved at design review contemporaneous with the streetscape improvement plan with the first phase of development. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 730044 06/30/2000 II:25A 289 Sara Flahor IS of I0 R 50.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 Earl* CO, F.w&ZUteso1ufioos11999 Rno1udoasU9-I81otcR.doe III. Required Agreements: 18. An Access Easement Agreement by Lot C for the benefit of Lot B executed prior to issuance of a building permit and approved by the Town of Avon. The Agreement must contain the following terms and conditions: i. A 39'0 access easement at Sunroad Le, 19'5" on each property. ii. Reciprocity for access and storage during construction. iii, This Agreement will also set forth authorization for construction and management of the storm drainage facilities from Lot B. 19. An Agreement will be required prior to issuance of a building permit for the management, design and construction of the storm water detention and pollution control facilities proposed on Town property known as "Tract G, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision". The PUD Development Plan in not an approval for the proposed use of Tract G for storm water and pollution control facilities. IV. Amendments to the PUD Development Plan: 20. The PUD Development Plan may be modified by reducing the number of time-share units to accommodate the required parking, additional retail space, employee housing, or hotel units without requiring a PUD Amendment. V. Final Design Review: 21. The accessibility and function of the trash and delivery areas is not approved. All aspects of the trash and delivery areas will be resolved and clarified at Design Review. 22. The architecture, construction details, final grading and drainage plans depicted in the PUD Development Plan are conceptual only. A separate process is required for refining and resolving the details for the project. 111111 IIIII 1111111 III 1111111 IIIII IIIII III 111111 III IN 730544 05/30/2000 111258 289 Sara Fisher 17 of 10 R 00.00 o 0.00 N 0.00 Eagle CO F.\p&Mesoludons\1999 Raoludoos\99-191=RAa ADOPTED THIS 21h DAY OF DECEMBER, I999 Signed: /) i Anne Fehlner, Chai Greg Macik, Secretary 1111111111111111111 III 11111111111111111 III 111111 III IN 730844 09/38/2000 11:25A 28! Sara Fisher 18 of 18 R 00.00 D 0.08 N 0.00 Eagle CO Date: 4�ioo Date: Z * F.1P&Z Rmoludoos\1999 ResoludonsV9.181DWRAne l 1 November 5,1999 Mr. Tom Obermeier OZ Architecture 1580 Lincoln Street Suite 1200 Denver, CO 80203 RE: Vistana Project — PUD Concept Review Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision Dear Tom: I am sending this letter to summarize the issues and comments from the Planning and Zoning Commission on the Lot C Concept Review on November 2, 1999. We hope these comments will assist you in preparing the revised application for the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on November 16, 1999. • The Commissioners concurred with the staff comments on zoning issues. All zoning encroachments and uses must be listed on the site plan. Commissioner Evans commented that the applicants need to take construction activity into account with the zero setback for the underground garage. There must also be adequate space for landscaping within the project boundaries, especially along the perimeter of the parking garage. • The overall massing is a concern, including how it relates to setbacks. • The Commission also discussed that the Town Code limits compact parking spaces to 30 percent of structured parking, but expressed that this standard may be unrealistic for mountain communities where there seem to be more large vehicles. • They also indicated that having reserved parking spaces for the employees was important. • Most Commissioners expressed the opinion that the design of the pedestrian ways through the project has been significantly improved. • Several Commissioners expressed the need to have retail space and pedestrian amenities central to the site. The plans should provide flexibility for more retail on pedestrian levels. They also want to see a commitment to include the retail in earlier project phases. r 11/11199 Leper to Tom Obermeier 1 • The Commissioners requested detailed phasing plans indicating how each phase will meet Town requirements, including parking. • The Commissioners would like to see detached sidewalks. This would require location within the project boundaries. There was a significant amount of discussion on the project's architectural design. • There appeared to be a consensus that the proportion of the roof to the building needs to be addressed. • Several Commissioners suggested the roof plate be lowered and dormers be incorporated into the design to visually reduce the mass of the buildings. • There was a consensus on the need to have more architectural projections to break up wall planes and that more variety with the fenestration and balconies needs to be provided. • The Commissioners strongly encouraged the design to include more detailing utilizing a rich palette of materials and colors to provide architectural interest, and to create a human scale for the project. The Commission appeared favorable toward the detailed sketches for the first building level to create a pedestrian friendly environment. • The Commissioners also talked about the need to have a cohesive design for all of the buildings. • Several Commissioners expressed concerns about the height of the buildings. The 100 -foot height limit needs to be verified with the actual topographic elevations. • The Commissioners also discussed the shadow studies. The pedestrian spaces and employee housing units need to be designed to take advantage of solar access. The building design may need to be modified to provide better solar access such as lowering a section of the building or taking a notch out of it for better solar access. The applicants also need to ensure they have addressed areas where ice and snow build up can be anticipated. • The Commission questioned how the lock off component of the two bedroom timeshare units will function, including whether one bedroom units will be sold, traded or rented separately. The applicants should clarify on the floor plans whether any cooking facilities will be included in the accommodation units. Brett Miller's letter of November 3" will be included in the packet for the November 16i° Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. • There was discussion on the access and circulation design; including loading areas and bus "turn -around." • Service areas should be screened and present a finished appearance. • The Commission liked the changes in the employee units that introduced a variety of unit sizes, clarified that a lounge will be provided on each floor and that lockers will be provided. • The Commission commented that traffic flow must be carefully evaluated. This is our summary of the Commission comments. The revised plans must address these comments, in addition to those outlined in the submittal letter and staff concept review report. Engineering's comments are not provided in this letter and will be forwarded when they become available. Please be prepared to respond to their concerns. Please call us if you need clarification on any issues outlined in these documents. 11/11199 Letter to Tom Obermeier r We will need to receive the revised drawings and any supplemental written material by noon Wednesday to remain on the schedule for a public hearing on November 16". We will be happy to meet with you again prior to the meeting if this would be helpful to you. Please do not hesitate to call me at 970-748-4002. Sincerely, Karen Griffith, AICP Town Planner Cc: Mayor and Town Council Planning & Zoning Commission Bill Efting, Town Manager Mike Matzko, Community Development Director Norm Wood, Town Engineer Carol Gil-Mulson, Fire Marshall AVON C O L O R A D O October 20,1999 Mr. Tom Obermeier OZ Architecture 1580 Lincoln Street Suite 1200 Denver, CO 80203 RE: Vistana Project — PUD Submittal Review Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision Dear Tom: We received the PUD application for Lot C on October 18, and performed an initial review based on the PUD Review criteria listed in the. Zoning Code and the Downtown Design Guidelines. This letter summarizes staffs initial comments on the application. The two most important concerns are the overall architectural expression for the project and the vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Following is a summary of our issues that we have identified at this time. Zoning and Uses • •Encroachments into building setbacks must be defined and delineated on the plans, including projecting elements such as roof overhangs. • A maximum density for the employee units must be established. • The permitted and conditional uses must be listed on this plan document. • A note must be provided on the plans stating that The Town of Avon Zoning Code shall be used for any provisions not addressed in this PUD. Vehicular Circulation • Sun Road will serve as the primary access to the site. Staff does not support the direct access from West Beaver Creek Boulevard. Check-in areas should be consolidated between the hotel and time-share to reduce traffic impacts on Town Streets. • . The shared entry to Lot C and Lot B should be directly across from Sun Road. A roundabout Post Office Box w be a viable alternative to a conventional intersection. 400 Benchmark Road Avon, Colorado 81610 970-748-4000 970-949-9139 Fax 970-845-7708 77Y r 10/20/99 Letter to Tom Obermeier • The hotel drop off area on Sun Road may not provide adequate stacking and could result in congestion on Beaver Creek Boulevard. It does not appear to have an adequate turning radius for vehicles exiting the site, especially larger vehicles such as buses. • Curb cuts on Sun Road must be located so that an efficient circulation system can be developed, including adequate access for emergency vehicles and equipment. Staff strongly recommends that the drop off areas for Lot B and C have a more unified design and function. • Loading and service delivery areas are required and must be delineated on the site plans. The plans must show trash enclosure locations on East Side of site. • The parking lots must be designed for more efficient circulation with aisles to circulate traffic throughout the lots. • All parking spaces must be served by a 24 -foot aisle. • Plans need to incorporate all streetscape elements matching construction east of the property. There will not be sufficient right-of-way in West Beaver Creek Boulevard to accommodate the landscaping proposed. Pedestrian Circulation • A clear pedestrian connection between Beaver Creek Boulevard and the pedestrian mall should be provided. It is not clear how the proposed pedestrian connection adjacent to the pool functions. Based on the plan set, the path does not appear to be designed to provide a clear pedestrian walkway through the site. Please clarify this with building elevations at this location. • The sidewalk design along Sun Road does not appear to be very pedestrian friendly and needs to be improved. Pedestrian Mall • The Lot C development must have a strong relationship to the pedestrian mall. Please clarify how the proposed circular feature adjacent to the Mall will contribute to that strong relationship. • The plaza and fountain could be a significant amenity to the pedestrian mall with a more visible access. • Staff is recommending that the development contribute funding for the mall to be used toward landscaping, paving materials, sculpture and fountains, signage etc. Employee/Affordable Housing • The standard has been for a minimum size of one -bedroom units, rather than efficiency units. • A common lounge area should be provided. • More storage area needs to be provided. 10/20/99 Letter to Tom Obeimeigr Architectural Expression/Massing • The overall massing needs architectural interest through the addition of elements and articulation such as recesses, balconies, dormers, avoiding straight vertical walls, and more variety in fenestration. • This project lacks interesting projections and hierarchy of architectural elements, specifically the time-share building. • The roof overhangs are minimal and require better proportions to the vertical walls. • More detail should be added at ground level to provide an aesthetic, human scale throughout the pedestrian areas. • Many of the design features appear to suggest a `nautical' look that seems out of context in Avon. Self -Containment /Enclosure of the Project Providing an open and welcoming quality for the public around and within the project is essential. However, the project appears somewhat isolated from the rest of the Town Center. It should encourage linkage to other buildings and avoid the appearance of a standalone project. The decision to maintain separate yet prominent entries for the timeshare and hotel elements results in more of the site being devoted to internal vehicle circulation. Submittal Requirements Please see attached submittal checklist. More information needs to be provided on all of the items that are circled. Also please provide the following items: • Clarify the roof color -it is brown on elevations and green on the site plan. We encourage the use of more natural colors. • Provide elevations to clarify the pedestrian pathway near the parking garage. • Clarify the entry overhang to the time-share building. These are our comments based on our initial review. We anticipate discussing the application in more detail during our meeting with you on Monday. We look forward to working with you to achieve a successful project on Lot C. Please feel free to contact us with any questions or concerns you have. Please do not hesitate to call me at 970-748-4002. Sincerely, 'r", Ae Karen Griffith, AICP Town Planner Cc: Mayor and Town Council Planning & Zoning Commission Bill Efting, Town Manager Mike Matzko, Community Development Director Norm Wood, Town Engineer Carol Gil-Mulson, Fire Marshall STARWOOD VACATION OWN r R SH I P October 31, 2001 Ms. Ruth Bome Development Director Town of Avon P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 Re: Town of Avon, Ordinance No. 02, Series Of 2000, Exhibit B, Amendment To Development Agreement For Confluence and Tract C Dear Ruth: This letter will confirm our telephone conversation on October 27, 2001, regarding parking required by the PUD Development Plan for Tract C, Phase 1-A and Phase 1-B. Required parking for Phase 1-A is 180 spaces and Phase 1-B is 11 spaces for a total of 191 spaces. Phase 1-C required parking is 183 spaces. Currently there are 164 spaces constructed in Phase 1-A which is 16 spaces less than the required 180 spaces. Points of Colorado, Inc., (Owner) agrees to either increase -the parking spaces in Phase 1-B by the number necessary so the total parking spaces in Phase 1-A and Phase 1-13 will equal the required 191 spaces or seek a mitigation of the parking requirements with a payment in lieu under the Town of Avon Ordinance No. 99-05, Series of 1999, or seek such other arrangements as are agreeable to the Town. Owner further agrees there will be no reduction in Phase 1-C Hotel Units, overall commercial square footage, 4,800 SQ.FT. GLFA of Restaurant Space in the Hotel and the 183 required parking spaces in Phase 1-C. Sincerely yours, POINTS OF COLORADO, C. t? A Jam A McKnight Senior Vice -President JAM/lis / 1 % i .I ,Cr ti; •y R'1)IM Nu�gtlrn, rigtll,.^J,. •r 1h. •' nu• ra. W Ir, 1. •r �.rn .♦ N9U1 VI'. I A NA 41 PI TIIF 4RI:I• URI IN N r111 11(1111 OA I.itJI Mr'•4 .401 ll: ) S )),q it PJ.V "ilAll LY.) )1".0 1.91A C O L 0 R A July 1, 2005 Points of Colorado, Inc. 8801 Vistana Centre Drive Orlando, FL 32821 G IL Mrs. Ruth Bome VIA FAX (970) 748-1189 PO Box 7833 Avon, CO 81620 Post Orice Har 975 400•Benchulark Road Avon, Colorado 81620 970.748.9000 970.949-9139 Far 970.845.7708 TTY RE: Lot(s) 2C, 3, 4, and 5, Mountain Vista Subdivision — Lot C PUD Amendment Dear Ruth: We have completed our initial review of the proposed PUD amendment for Lot C, and would like to offer the following comments or observations regarding the merits of your proposal. The purpose of these comments is to outline our concerns regarding your application in an effort initiate a discussion prior to the upcoming public hearings. Land Use The approved PUD was represented and approved as a mixed-use project that included lodging, restaurant, retail, office, commercial conference center, and other uses. While the project currently contains timeshare units, employee housing, and retail/offices uses, we feel that the proposed amendment is a departure from the level or quality of mixed uses that was originally approved. The elimination of approximately 3,000 sq. ft. of commercial space, 4,800 sq.ft of restaurant space, and the 125 -room hotel to be substituted for additional timeshare units runs counter to the planning principles outlined in the Comprehensive Plan and the Main Street Implementation Plan. (Policy A3.6, B2.3, and Subarea 1: West Town Center District) Density The currently approved residential density of this PUD is 133 subdividable units, or 266 dwelling units and 20 employee housing units. The proposed density 219 units, or 438 dwelling units represent an approximate 65% increase In dwelling units or 135 units per acre (3.24 acres / 438 units). By comparison, the Town Center (TC) zone, the predominant zoning district in the Town Core, permits only 30 units per acre. Staff finds it difficult to support the drastic percentage increase in residential density given the corresponding decrease in percentage of commercial/retail use. Scale/Mass Given the proximity of the site to Main Street, it is imperative that the street level architecture enhances pedestrian activity and encourages a lively center of retail activity. The scale and massing of the proposed buildings (Phase 1C and 1D) minimizes the appearance of stepping the structure down in mass towards the mall area. The building appears to stand-alone and create a barrier to the future "public spaces" located along the mall. Special attention should be given to the height, width, and length of the proposed structures to maximize the comfort to users of both Lot C and Main Street. We feel this could be achieved by stepping -down the massing furtherer and providing detail at the ground level to enhance the pedestrian areas. Relationship to surrounding development and Main Street Lot C is an integral part of the Town Core and should complement the surrounding town center developments and future development by providing a variety of uses. This site serves as an anchor for Main Street and the originally approved ground -level retail space and restaurant provides a greater opportunity to attract pedestrians along the perimeter of the project. Parking As you are aware the required parking for the site, existing and proposed, will be a challenge to reconcile. Our approach to reconciling the parking is to apply the standing parking requirement in the Avon Municipal Code, including the provision for the mixed- use reduction. Based on our calculations, the proposed parking appears to be deficient. Please provide an explanation of how you intend to address these deficiencies (pay -in - lieu, variance, etc.) Water Our calculations indicate the proposed PUD will increase water rights requirements by approximately 24.72 acre feet above the water rights required to supply the development under the original zoning. Please indicate how these additional water rights will be provided to the Town for this additional demand. Financial Analysis Stan Bernstein and Associates have prepared a letter dated February 10, 2005 outlining concerns regarding the Fiscal Impact Analysis prepared by PricewaterhouseCooper L.L.P. Staff shares these same concerns, please see attached letter. We are available to meet and discuss this letter in detail at your convenience and suggest that we do so prior to the July 19th, 2005 public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission. Sincerely,, Eric Heidemann, AICP Senior Planner Cc: Tambi Katieb, Director of Community Development Norman Wood, Town Engineer File AVON C O L O R A D O June 20, 2005 Points of Colorado, Inc. 8801 Vistana Centre Drive Orlando, FL 32821 Mrs. Ruth Borne VIA FAX (970) 748-1189 PO Box 7833 Avon, CO 81620 C Post Office Box 975 400'Betrchaxtrk Roo Avon. Colorado 81671) 970-748.4000 970.949.9139 Far 970.845.7708 M RE: Lot(s) 2C, 3, 4, and 5, Mountain Vista Subdivision — Lot C PUD Amendment Dear Ruth: Thank you for your response to our completeness review letter dated May 20, 2005.We received the last of the outstanding items (massing model) on June 13'h, 2005 and therefore find your application complete. Please contact me if you have any questions or need further clarification at 748-4009. Kind Regards, Eric Heidemann, AICP Senior Planner cc: File Z-PU2005-3 Tambi Katieb, Community Development Director Norm Wood, Town Engineei- Larry Brooks, Town Manager John Dunn, Town Attorney ,O N C O L O R A D O May 24, 2005 Mrs. Ruth Borne PO Box 7833 Avon, CO 81620 VIA FAX (970) 748-1189 Post Orice Box 975 400 Benchmark Road Avon, Colorado 81620 970-748.4000 970.949-9139 Far 970.845-7708 77Y RE: Lot(s) 2C, 3, 4, and 5, Mountain Vista Subdivision —Lot C PUD Amendment Dear Ruth: - We have received your response to our completeness review letter dated May 17th, 2005 and are requiring the following items be submitted in order to deem this application complete: 1. We understand your concern regarding the need for a detailed massing model at this time and the potential for refinement and alterations as we proceed through subsequent' hearings. However, the massing model is required prior to finding the application complete. We have the dimensions of the model that was provided in the original application to aid you in the development of the massing model to `replace' the buildings on this site to scale. 2. The preparation of a revised development agreement(s), while ultimately being the decision of Council to negotiate terms, will be the result of an application that proposes certain changes from the existing PUD and Development Agreement. While we will not require a strikethrough version of the agreement, you are being required to submit a summary of proposed changes from the existing PUD that outlines what entitlements are current, what is proposed in the application, and what potential benefits are associated (in your view) for each aspect of the proposal. Staff will not negotiate points with you in this regard as you propose, and you have declined a joint work session to discuss the proposed changes. Therefore, a complete summary of proposed changes will be required to find the application complete. We have attached a sample document from another applicant that meets our requirements in this regard. Please note that in addition to changes in the existing business points set forth in the development agreement, your proposal may generate additional discussion points for our mutual consideration. Please contact me if you have any questions or need further clarification at 748- 4009. Kind Regards, Eric Heideman, AICP Senior Planer cc: File Z-PU2005-3 Tambi Katieb, Community Development Director Larry Brooks, Town Manager Points of Colorado, Inc. (8801 Vistana Centre Drive, Orlando, FL 3282 1) RECEIVED RUTH O. BORNE MAY 2`3 2005 ATTORNEY AT LAW Community Devek,,..,ant P.O. BOX 7833 AVON, CO 81 520 (970) 748-1187 FAX (970) 748-1 189 RLTHOMARCINENOINEERINO.COM ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN FLORIDA ANO COLORADO May 18, 2005 Eric Heidemann Town of Avon P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 RE: Sheraton Mountain Vista — Lot C PUD Amendment Response to Completeness Letter dated 5117105 Dear Eric: Thanks for taking the time to speak with me yesterday regarding your completeness review. Accordingly, I am providing my response in writing to the completeness comments dated May 17, 2005. 1. We will be remitting the additional $500 for the application fee. 2. We are more than willing to provide a model and/or visual analysis as we discussed in our pre -application meeting on April 13, 2005. The concern we have with submitting a model prior to a scheduled meeting with the Planning & Zoning Commission is that we expect several meetings with staff regarding the substantive review of the plans, which will result in modifications to the architectural and civil plans. It is costly and. time consuming to submit this amount of detail prior to a better understanding of what we need to bring to the Planning & Zoning Commission. As you know, it is an evolving product from original submittal to final approval of the ordinance. At each step of the process, we will be refining the model and/or visual analysis. Therefore, we request that a model and/or visual analysis be submitted on or before the date the public notices are mailed and are scheduled for Planning & Zoning Commission. 3. As we discussed in our meeting on April 13, 2005, we anticipate creating one document outlining all of the relevant terms and conditions from the two development agreements that apply to this project. The outline submitted highlights the issue to be discussed. Our previous experience with staff on this project is that we work together to address the items necessary to prepare a draft development agreement and proceed accordingly. In fact, the development agreement is an issue limited to the legislative body and not the r r Planning & Zoning Commission. The most time consuming element of the process will be negotiating the terms and conditions of the new development agreement. Our recommmndstion is to sit down with staff as soon as possible and begin outlining the essential elements of the agreements. In response, we can begin drafting an agreement as timely as possible. 4. The public notification may be amended by staff. Our only request is that we review the contents prior to the dispatch of the public notice. With regard to the public notice requirements, it our understanding of the Avon Municipal Code, Section 17.12.100 that owners of a multi -family condominium may be served by mailing a copy of any such notice to the manager, registered agent or any member of the board of directors of the homeowner's association. The employee housing units are part of a homeowner's association. If there are additional provisions of the public notice requirements which specify that notice to'each individual property owner is required, please let me know. We look forward to your timely response and will make ourselves available to begin working through some of these items necessary to create an effective approval process. Kind regards, fao.� Bome cc: Jim McKnight A.Sheykhet RECEIVED MAY 2 3 2005 Community Development "ON C O L O R A D O May 17, 2005 Points of Colorado, Inc. 8801 Vistana Centre Drive Orlando, FL 32821 Post Oce Bar 975 400 BenckAjark.Rcal Aron, Colorado 81 "I 970-748.4000 970-949-9139 Far 970.845-7708 77Y Mrs. Ruth Borne VIA FAX (970) 748-1189 PO Box 7833 Avon, CO 81620 RE: Lot(s) 2C, 3, 4, and 5, Mountain Vista Subdivision — Lot C PUD Amendment Dear Ruth: We have completed a preliminary review of your PUD amendment application for the Lot C PUD. The following is a list of comments that should be addressed prior to finding the application complete: 1. According to our fee schedule, the fee for a PUD amendment is $1,500 for all projects over 50 dwelling units. Please remit payment of the outstanding balance ($500.00). 2. Per our conversation on April 13'h, 2005 and the PUD requirements (17.20.110d.2.c) a model (massing, photographic, or other) that adequately demonstrates a visual analysis of the proposed development in relationship to development on adjacent parcels was to, accompany the PUD amendment application. Please provide the model, preferably at a scale to that of the prior application, as required. 3. The "Outline of Terms and Conditions for Modification to the Lot C Development Agreement" located in Tab "C" of the application does not adequately describe the requested amendments to the existing development agreement(s). Please provide a strikethrough version of the proposed development agreement(s). Addressing provisions of the agreement as "requiring discussion" is insufficient. 4. Please be aware that staff may augment the public notification to accurately describe the nature of the proposed amendment. In addition, please revise the notification list to capture those property owners (i.e. employee housing units) that would not otherwise receive the public notice. Once staff has found your application to be complete, we will notify you of the number of copies required to be submitted for referral purposes. I look forward to meeting with you to discuss these comments. Please contact me if you have any questions or need' further clarification at 7484009. Kind Regards i/ Enc Hedemann, Senior Planner cc: File Z-PU2005-3 Tambi Katieb, Community Development Director Norm Wood, Town Engineer Larry Brooks, Town Manager John Dunn, Town Attorney Message Z(�G� <<p if F Page 1 of I Ruth Weiss From: Andre DeLucinges [adelucingesQa eastwestresorts.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 8:51 AM To: Ruth Weiss Subject: LOT C PUD amendment July 15, 2005 Recording Secretary Town of Avon PO BOX 975 Avon Colorado 81620 Dear Avon Planning and Zoning Commission, This letter is in response to Points of Colorado's request for a Lot C PUD amendment to modify the existing property rights and zoning. We at Falcon Point Resort support adding more time-share units to Sheraton Mountain Vista instead of hotel rooms. However, we are surprised that you have removed the restaurant from your plan: We ask the developer to reconsider this decision. With the anticipated growth of adding more time-share units to the community, we see it prudent that more amenities, such as a restaurant be developed to support the growth. We frequently receive comments from our owners and guests that there are not enough restaurants in the area. Adding time-share or hotel units without adding a restaurant will only continue to exacerbate this problem. Sincerely, Andre de Lucinges Falcon Point Resort General Manager Associate Broker East West Interval Sales, LLC P.O. Box 3069 Avon, CO 81620 Ph 970-949-4416 ext 1115 Fax 970-949-4668 7/19/2005 0 w W V W sc u L Z O XO =� g mz q q m U m m o m 2 "6 ttSS u¢'�omo gEa �mn 1Ea �mV r= vmF� Z.28 �m E�= ccm E�� ca` KEEm �gc m �' Bio c2m10 = o�m� X0¢0 m 0 0 �po pp s0 $ Xo K8o'n °dm am Kw —a 05 0 R N m W m 00 W CI m OI •tl% >. q T O q o m m C W C O C O C C > > U N O O 2 Z Z Z Z J m.. maa pp M N pp m N a p mm O E y E 0 IL q T m aE q T mrq a� q i q .. O ILa.X cci r C Si C' N N C Cd E ro ,� _ a ,� - of m vi - m = E m > - q a co c a c a X.a mem m CLL ri Sli ri IL a ZILa o y y N d—!� co hm» Q ui iii co Q Q ® H m Q Q C Q p O 0.% - q c O go g� 2 a qg mw mar � e miJ o ws i°aU Me ma o oQLL m'4` 0vm �qx 'o mE =OE o aLLJJo FRi m o m E o EE m `0 0 r o E Lcl ,BSc o24moo :e�� €vqi® mE$$.�n ac�. a n qz z -02 Nva 12N20 a IL uW- m o m m m 3 u m 4 m ~ L O d .2 m O m ~ O ~ O O [L It ¢ E X E m N m w q O V q 0 O W ix O f > a- vi a z z � x� E $ \ E \ 0 ) E � � § 0 0 k , .§ . ._� lf= #/)r| :2■.0 . !x§59 )kflk s*!k &»(- 2!`�� |)!£# |!■� )!£!« f!!f 2E!|! �a2lk 322» ■ # t§ k �� k� 2� 2( CLkK 0 /\ !g } 2� k 7` mE $ �f , 0® �m k� !� K§:2 f§ /\ a � - )� ; Memo � � A�I, VON To: Planning and Zoning Commission ` ° ` ° " " " ° From: Matt Pielsticker, Planner I Date: July 29, 2005 Re: Landscaping Condition of Approval Lot 58, Block 4, WLldridge Subdivision / 5170 Longsun Lane Summary: At the Commission's June 1, 2004 meeting, a final design plan was approved for the subject property with the following condition: "Additional landscaping shall be included between the driveway and the first retaining wall on a revised landscape plan to be submitted and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. An irrigation table must be provided." ® Both the original and new proposed landscape plans are attached for your review. The new landscape plan incorporates new Landscaping in the area between the driveway and first retaining wall and appears to have addressed the Commission's concerns and condition of approval. AKS Engineers, the engineers of record, recommend that "plantings that do not require constant irrigation once they are established, are natural to the botanical community, and are very drought tolerant be utilized at the top of walls and in between the walls" Also, "trees such as Ponderosa Pine or other pines and deciduous trees are appropriate at the base of the wall along the roadway." The new (revised) landscape plan Incorporates the following new plantings in between and in front of the retaining walls: • 8 Lilacs • 9 Chokecherries, and • 10 additional 2" aspen trees The new plantings proposed are drought tolerant and should not require 'constant irrigation once they are established: The applicant plans to remove the temporary irrigation required to establish these new plantings near the retaining walls. This application was discussed at your July 19, 2005 meeting and tabled. The Commission requested that the applicant be present to confirm that the Geotechnical Engineer has reviewed the landscaping plan and approved the proposal. Staff has since spoken with the applicant he will be present to discuss the application and conditions surrounding the project engineering review of the proposed changes, however, staff has received nothing in writing from the engineer to confirm that the review has indeed taken place. Recommended Motion: Staff would recommend the Commission take no action on the proposal until a letter is received from the Geotechnical Engineer who designed the walls stating that the proposed landscaping plan will not jeopardize the stability of the structures and is appropriate for the structural design. Attachments: • Original Landscape Plan • Revised Landscape Plan • Letter from AKS Engineers FROM : AKS -E NG PHONE NO. : 641 3172 Oct. 05 2004 10:00PM P2 i1K5 Crgrnecr� S M�acidc�,lx 7692 Ca>) Pod oao D w Parka, Golarra% 8018 (-'503) 841.711 S 64 Railroad AVWNA ,Minim. Colorado 81845 Vl Z004 -- 15 I Atbt: W. Robert MoshrmV Re: Men Bloch Retebih Wall Sysfasnrs, MechanieaW 9tlEbiilmod Em* WMa, Modteirq ResMor , Wlldnddge Eubdivislon, Avon, Colorado AKS Protect No. 044M A.KS Fs*Mn d Aasodalea, krc. (AKS) hes campistad errgiraer V WWYsis of the Ea y I trees Grid bushes ie proposed to be pie at the top of Nis between to warts and at the bees der warts. W has discussed the WK%c pkg plans wih Kaediein Engineers. Inc. AKS provides our concern for the waft and racoffirriarxiallorm for aflerrw4s larrdet Wk g In the bk wing para9raphr PW* gs dist raqui constant drip irrlgeeon at he top of the well or between the walla, may setualke to baME loll between he drakes and he back of the block, and mrdrdirAs to seelerrrertt and kmtebilh of the newly col and remolded slopes. pkv*v a between the wale wHh root bak 2400t In dimelia or larger will cut loP 9111071ds. Cutarg of gaagrida Is unacaePfable In any krcallm on the walls. We recartrrrrd that pMfftkgs that do not require constant irrigation once easy are established, are nreikral b ttr botanical corrcrnedly, and are very drought tolerant be udtmd at the top of the wade and In between the % aft. Traee such as Pondaroes Pine or other pines and deciduous trees are appropriate at the base of the well atorg the roadway, as bag as ponding of wads and erosion at the base of the wall does not occur. , We are avertable to discuss our concerns and recommendations with you. Please call should Rxelar conatreedon be required. Since", Ilfsi EkrpNrers IR Meoykom Inc. CC MSE Sbuchirm, Inc RECEIVED 1 0 6 2004 Community Development cry XVH/969S-LZ8-OL6 0OZ6-LZS-OL6 85918 OQV'dOZOJ `MVA SITS Xon a3lAAO ZSOCI JAIL `macrdvo s.ark for nm iNaclav!) S( mHof LL 'ON.L03fOlid SNOISIA3H II2Iamnsaa ajva ,�Zii ( a IvJs asa,dacry A -4-4 -IW a'I.LIZ uawdolanaQ 4Unww00 s- r OZ�Tinpbis 50 C13AI333H z a gA $° a� b N 00 a- r ,t `+ J 9na13U�Im - ssWaaal •ON J 'ON.I.J3 A8 CMAO A8 Nn i� � •"S 3.I.da oha `uamm). Samot X'3/9695-LZ8-OL6 "`' '• _ "'' 0OZ6-LZ8-0L6 W 85918 OGVUO'IOJ "TIVA a C) Sits XO$ 301.330 .I.SOCI to ;LL o 'OMI `I13aat+`.) S�3II�IHOf ¢ OEMN W "2 W --' 9na13U�Im - ssWaaal •ON J 'ON.I.J3 A8 CMAO A8 Nn i� � •"S 3.I.da Staff Report AVON FINAL DESIGN PLAN August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date July 29, 2005 Project type Duplex Legal description Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning PUD — 2 Dwelling Units Address 2160 Long Spur Introduction The applicant, Gerald Meremonte, is proposing a duplex on this downhill lot on Long Spur Road. The design utilizes a stucco exterior and flat roof design. The structure totals approximately 6,500 square feet. The sketch design plan for this project was reviewed at the Commission's June 7, 2005. The Commission discussed the architectural theme for this design in length at the sketch design review meeting. Additional comments from the Commission included discussion on the following items: o Compatibility with neighboring structures o Orientation o Asphalt turnaround area and possibility of a landscape island o "Minimalist" design concept o Flat roof and wall planes The applicant has revised the roof planes since sketch design review. Also, relief details have been added to the building elevations. Colored elevations and a color board showing the three proposed stucco colors will be available for Commission review at the meeting. Design Review Considerations According to the Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines, Section 7, the Commission shall consider the following items when reviewing the design of this project: 1. The conformance with setbacks, massing, access, land use and other provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code. • Allowed use: A single-family or duplex is would be allowed on the property. Density: The lot is zoned for a duplex and the density is appropriate. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 1 . Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge PUD, .—npbell/Meremonte Design August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 6 • Lot Coverage: Maximum site coverage allowed for this PUD is 40%. This project is in compliance with the PUD, proposing 27% lot coverage (building coverage plus impermeable driveway coverage). • Setbacks: The setbacks for the property are typical for the subdivision with a 25' front setback, and 10' side and rear yard building setbacks. This design appears to conform to the building setbacks, approaching but not exceeding the front and side setbacks. Easements: Easements of 10' in width border the entire property. Two boulder walls are proposed within the first 10 feet of the property. It is discouraged to place improvements within the 10' Slope Maintenance, Drainage, and Snow Storage Easement; however, given the distance from the road to the front property line the retaining walls should not interfere with the Town's maintenance operations. • Building Height. The maximum building height exceeds 35' on some portions of the parapet walls. The Guidelines state that "no exceptions to the height requirements shall be made, except for penetrations that add architectural variety such as flues, chimneys, cupolas, etc. Penetrations to the height limitations must be in scale with the structure." Staffs interpretation would be to allow these . small areas of penetration to the building height since they are in scale with the structure and they help add the architectural variety that the Commission suggested at the sketch design review meeting. Grading: The proposed grading is in compliance with Town standards. Drainage patterns appear to be functional and positive drainage should be achieved with the design. As proposed, drainage will leave the driveway in two directions, with one drain inlet near the garage door of the eastern unit. The underground drain would daylight on the other side of the structure. Details for this drainpipe will be required at building permit submittal. Parking: 6 parking spaces are required for this project, and 6 spaces are proposed. There are turnaround areas provided for vehicle movements on the site leaving the garages. The asphalt motor court area'was discussed at sketch review and the possibility of breaking up this area of the site with landscaping was suggested. No alterations to the site plan have been made since sketch design. However, you will find a "driveway alternative" included in the reduced plan set. The alternative design would reduce the amount of asphalt and on site parking. A final grading plan would need to be provided with the alternative driveway layout to ensure its functionality with existing and proposed grades. Snow Storage: At least 475 square feet of snow storage is required for the area of the proposed driveway (2,374 sf). Areas are called out on the Site Plan and it appears that snow storage can be accommodated for on site. Square footage numbers must be called out at building permit submittal to confirm that 475 square feet are provided. Town of Avon Community Development' (970) 748-4030 1Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge PUL, —ampbell/Meremonte Design August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 6 • Landscaping: The Landscaping Plan is in conformance with the Residential Design Guidelines. The total irrigated area appears to be in compliance with the Town's 20% maximum irrigated area requirement and a rain sensor is proposed with an automatic irrigation system. A mixture of spruce, aspens, crabapple, and shrubs are proposed. An irrigation table in compliance with the Design Guidelines has been requested by staff to confirm compliance with the 20% irrigated area requirement. 2. The general conformance with Goals and Policies of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan, and any sub -area plan which pertains. The project generally complies with the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Whether adequate development rights exist for the proposed improvements. Adequate development rights exist in the Wildridge Subdivision for a single-family residence or duplex. 4. The final design plan is in general conformance with Sub -Sections A through D of the Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Guidelines. Site Development o. Site Design: The site layout and building location are appropriate for the site. Development is pushed as far towards the top of the site as possible to achieve views over existing developments. o Site Access: Driveway grades are consistent with the Guidelines and do not exceed 10%. The driveway grades are no more than 2% near the garages and appear to be slightly over 4% for the initial descent off Long Spur. A perpendicular twenty (20) foot wide curb cut off Long Spur Road has been provided. Building Design: o Building Materials and Colors: Stucco is the predominate building material. The proposed colors appear to be earth tone and the color board will be available on the meeting date. It should be noted that the Design Guidelines encourage multiple building materials on each elevation of the structure and this design would be a departure from this guideline. o Exterior Walls, Roofs, and Architectural Interest The design proposes a flat parapet roof design with center drains. Following input from the Commission at sketch plan review, the roof elevations have been varied to break up the mass of the structure. More architectural interest has been provided with the breaking up of roof and wall planes and the addition of relief panels. o Outdoor Lighting: A lighting cut sheet has been provided and is included within the packet. The fixture is compliant with the Town's Outdoor lighting ordinance and is "full cut off' by definition. • Landscaping: Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 t, Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge PUD,—dmpbell/Meremonte Design j August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 6 o Retaining Walls: A boulder retaining wall is required to access the site on the north side of the property and this wall appears to be up to four feet in height. Additionally, a small wall is provided near the eastern unit's hammerhead turnaround/parking area. There does not appear to be a drainage structure through the retaining wall to facilitate drainage from the northern portion of the driveway onto the northern drainage easement. This should be clarified on the site plan. 5. The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography, to minimize site disturbance, orient with slope, step building with slope, and minimize benching or other significant alteration of existing topography. The design and building appear to be compatible with the site topography. Orientation of the building is to take advantage of the views to the Northeast above existing development. 6. The appearance of proposed improvements as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways, with respect to architectural style, massing, height, orientation to street, quality of materials, and colors. - The project should not dominate the landscape of the property. The scale of the proposed development is appropriate for the neighborhood and consistent with the PUD. High quality materials and earth tone colors should make this project beneficial to the neighborhood as viewed from adjacent properties. 7. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. During sketch review there was considerable discussion on the design concept and how it relates to other structures in the vicinity. Staff does not feel that any monetary values will be impaired. Aesthetic values could be experienced, but should not affect monetary values. 8. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. ' The project is in general conformance with the adopted goals and policies of the Town and is a use by right per the Wildridge PUD. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending approval of this final design plan for the duplex proposed for Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge PUD with the following conditions to be resolved prior to a building permit submittal: 1. An irrigation table in compliance with the Residential Design Guidelines must be submitted and approved by staff. 2. Details for the underground drainpipe including size and material must be provided to staff for review. 3. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 - I Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge PL -'ampbell/Meremonte Design August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 6 public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748-4017, or stop by the Community Development Department. Res ly submi Matt Pielsticker Planner I View of Lot 30, Block 1, WR from Long Spur Road Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Lot 30, Block 1, Wildridge PUD,—ampbelVMeremonte Design August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 of 6 i.�* M N� 'N View of existing duplex to the South from middle of Lot 30 View to the North looking at the existing duplex development Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 AVON C O L O R A D O Applicant: RECEIVED JUL 0 8 2005 F I N A L- D E S I G N Community Development Design Review Fee: Mailing Address: $af"+4 Sfl2f� 10 City: /a11 State:l�. It Phone #: �I419 13th Fax #:.d94c9 0l IT Cell #: Owner of Property: t= L -L' Mailing Address:f5pf 3T5 city:0 State:Gp. ,Zip:81Coi Phone M ."W"l CP l 5�7 Fax #: aWe9 co018 Cell #: 3?l0 54.11 Lot: o Block: I Subdivision: Project Street Address: 21 foo 1-�1-1f� SPJ¢' Project Name: -'loo tlt7t=I.IL� ❑ Addition ❑ Single Family 12 Duplex ❑ Triplex ❑ Other: Please Describe Your Project (arch. style, sq. ft., height, materials, colors, unique features): e eal,��yc ps.u�r�ttJm �oU�sl-tuts o�� *�tn� i1�t�.a-�-I.1�t.tesl-�1de 55 i We (1) represent that all information provided to the Town of Avon in connection with this application as true and correc hat we understand the Town of Avon regulations applicable to this project, and understand int ubmittals will delay application review. Owner designates Applicant as indicated act as resent all application submittals related to this project. Owner: 1 rx � -- (Print Name): 4W420.L-L 14-. MaV-& +toy (Print Name): 17o&+' G &tAj 6�L.L Date: —r • —( . 5 Date: Z • 'T • 5 Community Development, P.O. Box 975 Avon, CO 81620 (970)7484030 Fax (970)949-5749 (rev. 924/03) Page I of G40$4410uf 7 rp 4eL&+ P•Qd40- i� ll�Ft I.� palzdp -I- Ir-�al � of va•cz-flN�a N rweo+s + c.ts t. aft {z f�oFS . f�RC� i Fla �o iz . lza l l -I o e Sl.to4�l -ru* #ti uisO I✓s ,.Lm v- -I=;, f!pm-5W4col p -I o. r I or- A --S, 22!�.tz A►l- od%--"!Lt7t. 4o} bL�ud t*Wl-1't-IE vs� ort- +gtA S t.Go e VePl We eeo -os of-•+NtY- F3042,dpc+ b taLLorp I + '%. LGao t0� of LAJA" p1_AI-lam 14 +Wc-. t7 L t lJ l d^�i O 11 0¢ -t' NC-- ¢dsz t-� t-:ps 15 1-I irs5-i'6SLa�S1-� +d Gt2}�6•}� t7�t5r1-A11� 4 1WFs`wV-s-i- 'ISI-*- 4ep%IL-t:7IIJI- olr'� L'is.l �s W/.& M#&Klwl .M Pojina44- ory c5i l [di -Fo =p4la," +o -imp ow ^h4e!z r--,o&pom- pa+ IR1aLu� -F'p 4rraA tabs, 45JIly l Pea MIRAMONTI ARCHITECT PC POST OFFICE BOX S020 .AVON COLORADO 81620 T970949 1178 F970 919 0117 EXTERIOR MATERIALS LIST& NOTES TWO RESIDENCES 2160 LONG SPUR WILDRIDGE AVON, COLORADO 06/24/05 ROOF ALL FLAT ROOFS: BUILT-UP ROOF WITH PARAPET WALLS. SLOPE MINIMUM 1/8" PER FOOTTO CENTER ROOF DRAINS. PROVIDE HEAT TRACE AT DRAIN AND OVERFLOW SCUPPERS AT PERIMETER, SEE ROOF PLAN. PARAPET WALL COPING 24 GAUGE GALVANIZED STEEL PRIMED AND PAINTED TO MATCH STUCCO COLOR. 3" REVEALS AT SIDES WITH 1/2" HEM. CHIMNEY CAPS 24 GAUGE GALVANIZED STEEL PRIMED AND PAINTED TO MATCH STUCCO COLOR. 3" REVEAL AT SIDES WITH 1/2" HEM. FLASHING PROVIDE 24 GAUGE GALVANIZED STEEL PRIMED AND PANTED TO MATCH STUCCO COLOR AT ALL WINDOW AND DOOR HEADS. STUCCO _ TRADITIONALTWO COAT SYSTEM ON WIRE LATH ON 15# FELTS, WITH ELASTOMERIC PAINT, COLOR AS FOLLOWS: STUCCO FORM #1: COASTAL FOG, AC -1 BY BNJAMIN MOORE STUCCO FORM #2: WATERBURY CREAM, HC -31 BY BENJAMIN MOORE STUCCO FORM #3: COPPER MOUNTAIN, AC -12 BY BENJAMIN MOORE ( SEE A2.1 & A2.2 & COLORED BUILDING ELEVATIONS) DECK GUARD RAILS STUCCOED 2X6 WALLS WITH 2X8 CEDAR CAP. SEE COLORED BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR COLOR. CEDAR CAP STAIN: TAHOE BROWN, 57 OR NATURAL CEDARTONE, 45 DECK COLUMN BASES SEE STUCCO ABOVE. DECKING MATERIAL 2 X 6 REDWOOD BY "TREX" NAIL SPACED, SEALED NATURAL WINDOWS & DOORS "SEMCO" ALUMINUM CLAD, QUAKER BRONZE FINISH. CUSTOM FRONT ENTRY DOOR: STAINED: MOORWOOD, TAHOE BROWN #57 BY BNJAMIN MOORE CUSTOM GARAGE DOORS & TRIM: STAINED: MOORWOOD, TAHOE BROWN #57 BY BENJAMIN MOORE COVERED PORCH, WALKS &TERRACES COLORED CONCRETE, COLOR TEXTURE TO BE DETERMINED. NIRANONTI ARCHITECT PC • POST OFFICE BOX 5820 AVON COLORADO 81620 T970 919 1138 F970 919 0117 EXTERIOR MATERIALS LIST & NOTES CONTINUED TWO RESIDENCES 2160 LONG SPUR WILDRIDGE AVON, COLORADO 06/24/05 GENERAL NOTES 1) ALL RETAINING WALLS OVER 4'0" IN HEIGHT TO BE DESIGN BY A LICENSED COLORADO ENGINEER 2) A MOCK-UP INSPECTION & APPROVAL IS REQUIRED ONSITE PRIOR TO APPLICATION OF ANY EXTERIOR MATERIALS 3) ALL VENTS, METERS (GAS OR ELECTRIC) WOR ANY RELATED SUPPORT CONDUIT TO BE PAINTED TO MATCH SURROUNDING EXTERIOR MATERIALS 4) ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING NOT SHOWN ON THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS TO BE RECESSED CAN LIGHTING IN THE ROOF OVERHANG SOFFITS OR RECESSED STEP LIGHTING LOCATED IN COLUMN BASES AND/OR NEWEL POSTS AT DECKS/BALCONIES 5) ALL AREAS OUTSIDE OF LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE AS SHOWN ON SITE PLAN SP -1 ARE NOT TO BE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION psi► V-F-�t;-IJe--9:p . I o . 4-o co jAJo. j2 I I,1G55 lr-al-�-s�.liz- _.h111�b�1t2�1 _ MIRAMONTI ARCHITECT PC POST OFFICE BOX 5870 AVON COLORADO 81670 T970 949 1138 F970 949 0117 Wad- JOI LAMPS PLUS: Print Product Photos LAM PWS. Bronze Outdoor Tube Lite (21618) Page IofI Clean„ modern design, yet adaptable for any decor, this unique outdoor wallmount in bronze makes a wonderful home accent. Its measures Thigh x 4-1/2"wide. Extends 7" from the wall. Takes one 75 watt bulb standard base (not included). Backplate measures 4-1/2". Compare at $74.99 Ships in 3 Days - This Item Ships FREE LAMPS PLUS Price $49.99 http://www.LampsPlus.com 1-800-782-1967 * Offer applies only to shipments made to the 48 continental'US States. hitp://www.lampspl us.com/htmis/pri ntoutproduct/Pri ntProdUctPhotos.aspx?ShortSKU=2161... 6/9/2005 ,�: �_ - '�� -� ;' '>� :.'tl �F\�� ndi.. "S Y� R n } �� 6 is yL,� W -111I. �II yL,� a VA 33 d d 0 0 n� �� II / � a 9�aA N a 7:Z N� �{ps qq yM� aim ga. t"pG; FS a 8.9 o 04 mo s' IP i m c� _ **� .• Q Z5 LO Lei C4 S T N J • M 4 ' - mwvw�coeeooentn •�w•�area.v�rorneeeama CL U- . w li v 46 $� q ct NN ? tn /1, 4ITIGI111'I r ,.:.;,:e.r.., r � 'Z1(►�i�l � (`IO�I Oo71 Z .;e :.>:® — � ens , -not .....,., .,,, . . z I I Qi j ♦ a iF9I • -u I I . uyly�l'z `•� � ,I r�is i��ly I ,si" i�'�Is `_—_ uta IYL - � ski i� � I -�. 4 I - nil i; r47 I I _ j I 2A 14 - ..ef' :v r7el . I _ 4 IL rl 4 I - nil i; r47 I I _ j I 2A 14 - ..ef' . I _ 4 I - nil i; r47 I I _ j I 2A 14 - ..ef' iz ir'�lf 'I�i or 711-il r4 rA N S_ N M ' 1 k� I 0 J •[,t ea .else •s� ..�.�,;..... .• t[.e..,,.® iz ir'�lf 'I�i or 711-il r4 rA N S_ N M ' 1 k� I 0 t Staff Report Sketch Desi A 1 wvv-� � VON ■■ C O L O R A D O August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date July 27, 2005 Project type Duplex Legal description Lot 48, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning 2 Units — Residential Duplex Address 5151 Longsun Lane Introduction Andrew Royster of Fieldstone Development LLC is proposing a duplex on this half -acre property on Longsun Lane. Both units of the duplex feature a mirrored floor plan layout, with 3,120 square feet of living space. Proposed materials include vertical wood siding, stucco, and stone accents. The property is on the downhill side of Longsun Lane and bordered by a developed duplex to the north, a vacant duplex parcel to the south, and an Open Space parcel at the bottom of the property. Development Standards for Lot 48, Block 4, Wildridge: Front setback: 25 feet Side setbacks: 10 feet Rear setback: 10 feet Maximum Building Height: 35 feet Maximum Site Coverage: 50% Minimum Landscaped Area: 25% Maximum Density: 2 Residential Dwelling Units Staff Comments Although in general conformance with the Design Guidelines, this application appears to conflict with some of the requirements included in the Guidelines, particularly the 'duplex development' guideline. This guideline states that "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." Architectural interest is provided to distinguish this structure from a single-family home; however, it appears to be a mirror image design. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 48, Block 4, Wildridge ,division, Sketch Design I i August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 4 A perpendicular access from Longsun Lane is proposed opening up to a shared motor court area between each unit of the duplex. The Guidelines state that "the blending of access with the natural contours of a site ... is important in establishing a successful access." The proposed access is contrary to this design philosophy. Drainage must be demonstrated at final design in the motor court area to show how water will be taken from the driveway around the structure. It appears that a swale will be used to take water off the driveway. Parking should be reviewed since there are limited areas to park and/or turnaround outside of the two garages. Six parking spaces and their maneuvering must be demonstrated at final design. The proposed roof overhangs (18" to T) border the front and side yard building setbacks. The roof plan indicates that all roofs will utilize south facing 4:12 pitches. The Commission must determine whether this roof type is appropriate for the neighborhood. The roofing material must be called out at final design submittal. Building height is difficult to determine with this sketch submittal and appears to approach the maximum allowable. No exceptions to the height requirement will be made except for penetrations that add architectural variety such as with the chimneys. Also difficult to determine is the relationship of the building elevations to the floor plans. For example, some of the streets facing windows indicated on the elevations do not appear on the floor plan drawings. This would need to be clarified at final design submittal. The Residential Design Guidelines state "all designs shall be compatible with existing built structures, the immediate unbuilt environment, and the design philosophy of the Town." Staff is concerned that this design may be incompatible with adjacent structures and this design should be reviewed carefully against adjacent developments. It should be noted that the brick "box" house nearby has received considerable negative feedback since construction. Design Review Considerations The Commission shall evaluate the design of the sketch plan 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 Residential Development Sections A through D of the Town of Avon Residential. Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines. The Commission will take no formal action on this sketch plan application. Direction on the design should be given to the applicant from the Commission to incorporate into a final design application. Staff will provide a full plan set for you Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 48, Block 4, Wildridgc —abdivision, Sketch Design August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 4 to provide written comments and guidance to the applicant at your August 2, 2005 meeting. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748-4413, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectf ubmitted, Matt Pielsticker Planner I �x y 'A Looking down towards pump station (Tract D). Lot 49 duplex in foreground. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 48, Block 4, Wildridge division, Sketch Design August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 4 y.«. �• Y vr. n.. n t. l d v Looking South over vacant lot to the south at existing development Looking to .4* w• CC s y S S — A ` -t+ standing on edge of Lot 48 Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Owl 8 m 08918 0) uoAb, a No I T a q a [ A . o a S- 500Z•933.SZ ue�d gad �m�o hew ��a 'suoisuawip ui suoi4eiJen JowW -suoi4e)yi)ads I sued a6uey3 o{ 4y6iJ sanJasai japing (0110 Z)1•Zd Z908 9H OL6J 1908 M OL6d 1£91'8 03 al6e3 jooi j puo)aS'9 6wplm8 jaajjS �(eMpeoig IIE - sawoH a6piJpI!A MaN .. . ur1 - 0.l - 09918 0) UO* N 1pidplim ^' voig $*;oq Rld i Z Q J lZ O O J W J _ 0 W tY Z Cl. O aj V v N rD d p� N e— 'O N OJ L J N W J `V— N k -v C . O � O 3 m c J 5001933 SZ •ueld jad Immo Am .i}a 'suoisuabp w suoi jeiJen JouiW •suoi juipads I sued a6uey) o f 146IJ sanJasaJ jape q (OL Jo EI Z ld 1908 HE OL61 1908 81E OL6d IE918 0) al6e3 joo13 puo)as 9 6uiplin8 jaajjSAempeeeooig [JE - sawoH a6piJpIiM MaN ..O -R -,,l N 09912 OD UOA� N �Fpiapll f N P019 Y* PI i xoldn6 olkRld Ir -----------------------------ll II .I II it it II II ' II II 11 II ' II II II II II II II • II II ' II Ii II II II ' II' II II II IL-------- -------------------- L------------------ — — — — — — — — — — — — 8 � Z Q J ' O O J W LL- CL Ld O. _W GJ Z ro O n V N OJ i H M •C J �- W N � O W N J O� W L LM O o_ c n C= o \3 I \ I \ i \ \ SOOT 933 SZ •ueld uad in»o Aew )Ia'suoisuawip ui suoileiJen JouiW •suoijuipads'8 sued a6ueq) of ly6iJ sanJasau japlmg (01 Jo 1) E•Zd 2909 9ZE OL6J 1909 9ZE OL6d KM 03 a*3 Joo13 puoias g 6uipling aaajiS AeMpeoig 1qE - sawoH a6p!JpI!M MaN "o -'s -J N 09912 (D 1104� N B piapq f N � ID019 $t 1aT xeDidn6 Olkfdd II II 11 1 iI 11 II II II II II II II II • II II , II II II • II II II II 11 II II II II II II ------------- -------------- SOOZ 933 SZ •ueld jad in»o Aew •){a 'suoisuawp ui suoi{e[Jen JouiW 'suoile)ij!)ads I sued a6uey) o{ iy6iJ sanJasaJ jappq (OL Jo Sl 7 Zd Z9O9 HE OL6J 1908 8ZE OL6d 018 0] al6e3 X0013 puo)a g 6uippng jaajjS AeMpeoig 1IE - sawoH a6pijpliM MaN IIO ID'Ul N 09919 0) UOAl N Mmipllm N * vole $t 101 . 1 1 , 1 , 1 1 1 , 1 1 • • i 1 O i 1 i , SZ[SSiiiiLlf�• 1 1 ' . ----- --- Jl�[ima rtnannsmnssxiruus�, 1 1 _ i • . 1 1 1 1 1 . ' 1 1 C) W J l� . i 1 Q Q 1 1 Q- UJ . LLJ 1 CD y 1 ` W IJl �% W `% W �_ ,� J d W >- CU W v J rO tn V/ y `` � . W C i :. i / Q CV m cc cc II SOOZ 933 SZ -ueld jad in»o Aew •)Ia 'suoisuawlp ui suoi}eijen JowW •suoijuipads I sued a6uey) o f 146IJ sanJasaJ JapPin9. (01 J0 9) S'Zd Z908 8ZE OW 1908 SZE OL6d 1E918 03 al6e3 JooIJ puMS 9 6uwplm8 laajlS Aempeoig [q - sawoH a6piJpIiM MaN N 0991B 0) 404� N *wIlm N t voig 8t loq ud � _---------------1----------------�I I---------L---------I------------------- I I I I I I I I . I I I I I I I , I I , I I 1 I I I I 1 I • 1 I I I I I I ---L----------- I I I - — —y --------------- I ' I SON 933 SZ -ueld jad in»o stew *iaa 'suoisuawip w suoileiien JouiW I sued a6uey) o+ 446IJ sanJasaJ Japp9 (6t 10 LI VEd Z908*8ZE OL6J 1908 RE OL6d 1E918 0) al6e3 JOo13 puo)aS 9 6wplrn9 jaaj{S Ae}( M/ pe�oig 17E - sawoH a6piJpI!M MaN "o-6`QQ7,�Rt "I N 0991$ OD UOAy N Mpldplim N t Q019 �" � XOIAGOIMM SOOZ 933 5Z ueld gad in»o Aew }a 'suoisuawip ui suoileijen JouiW suoijap)ads I sue d a6uey) ol 146iJ sanJasaJ jappng (01 JO 8) Z*EV Z908 HE OL6J 1908 8ZE OL6d 1E918 0) al6e3 X0013 puo)a g 6uwplmg 4aaj4S �SeMpeoig 17E - sawoH a6piJpIiM MaN � ppt . u0"01-.1u� -.09912 00) uon� N opTj[ !M N* a0 [� S�Y loq �z W J W H O a J F- d W V Z O v W D I � J 3 CO co J SON 933 SZ •ueid jad in»o Aew .)aa 'suolsuawlp ui suoi�ei�en �owW -suoi4e)i ji)ads IIsue�d a6uey) of 4g611 san�asai jappq 101 }0.6) E'Ed Z908 8ZE OLO 1908 8ZE OL6d 1E918 0] al6e3 joo13 puo)a 9 6uiplin8•L�/aaJIS �te�MJPe�oJB 1IE - sawoH a6pijpl!M maN .01%1 N 09919 0) UOA� N Z�PljpllM N 42ole B T� ` I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -_-4 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I _ J SON 933 sZ •ueld jad in»o Aew -jj8 'suoisuawip w suoi jelJen JowW •suoi juipads I sued a6uey) o f jy6iJ sanJasaJ J.aplmg (0l J0 00 I'D Z909 9ZE OL6J 1909 9ZE OL6d 1E919 0) al6e3 joo13 puo)a g 6uiplmg {aaj4S �(eMpeoig LhE - sawoH a6piJpIiM MaN „O ,9=„ 1 N 09912 ())uon� N ��plapuffi N * vole gfi tai I I I I I I I I I I v i i Staff Report VON Minor Project - Fence C 0 L 0 R A D0 August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report Date July 27, 2005 Project Type Minor Project —.Fence Legal Description Lot 63, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Address 4281 Wildridge Road West Introduction Henry Schneidman is proposing a rounded log/chicken wire fence in the rear yard of his property in Wildridge. The fence has already been installed (in place of an existing split rail fence), and this application follows a meeting on site with the Town's Code Enforcement Officer. Because this application fails to meet the criteria for residential fences as outlined in the Design Guidelines, specific approval from the Commission is required. Attached to this report is a digital photograph showing the fence and the application form with explanation provided. Design Review Considerations According to the Commission's Procedures, Rules & Regulations, Section 4.10, the Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of this project: 1. Fence material shall be wood and no more than four feet in height The material is rounded wood logs stained to match the single-family log home. Chicken wire has been installed between the logs to keep the owners pets within the fenced area. The proposed height of the fence is approximately 4' 10" tall. 2. Split rail design with no more than 2 horizontal `rails.' The proposed fence utilizes three horizontal 'rails.' 3. Does not delineate property lines. The proposed fence does not delineate the property lines. 4. Fenced area is less than 2,000 square feet. The fence measures approximately 1200 square feet, thereby in compliance with the maximum allowable square footage requirement. 5. Wildlife migration is not negatively affected with the proposed fence design. Wildlife migration may be affected with the fence design. 6. If part of a multi -family project approval must be received from the association, and the fence design must be integrated with the overall landscape design of the property. Not applicable. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 7484,030 Fax (970) 949-5749 l Lot 63, Block 3, Wildridge Sub ion, Minor Project — Fence August 2, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Page 2 of 2 7. If located on a duplex property, written approval must be received from adjoining property. owner and the fence design must be integrated with the overall landscape design. Not applicable. The property has a single-family log home constructed. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the application for the fence located on Lot 63, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision because the application fails to meet requirements 1, 2, & 5 of the Residential Design Guidelines. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please do not hesitate to call me at 748.4009 or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, Matt Pielsticker Planner I Aft: Application - Dated July 18, 2005 Digital Photograph of Fenced Area Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 1 Fax (970) 949-5749. Q .A - MINOR PROJECT and/or�g � MINOR MODIFICATION , $75 NameAn4-/� 0 Pals (Last) F7 Address , Address %V1 LAE, (�"// (Str t �^ (City) (State) c (Zip Code) Telephone Fax Cell 3 ''S CONTACT INFORMATION Name S'e'rn e— (Last) (Flrst) Address (Street) (City) (State) (Zip Code) Telephone Fax Cell Lot. Block Subdivision Street Address Type of Design Change requested: t2� Fence ❑ Window(s) ❑ Addition ❑ Deck ❑ Modification to Final Design Approval ❑ Color Change ❑ Material Change ❑ Landscaping ❑ Other: P ject Descdpti n (mate Is, colors, ppeight, uni a eat es, arcpp. style, etc) �nU� Q /� �,nr& r -'t M loS Aty,nt? . 'aXhVJ A Submit the following items with application: ' `� ver ❑ Site Plan - 2 Sets ❑ Elevations - 2 Sets ❑ Colors & Materials RECEIVED I (we) represent that all information provided to the Town of Avon in connection with tFlii dj3j3iMOMMIN'Iffff correct, that I (we) understand the Town of Avon regulations applicable to this project, and understand that incomplete submittals will del y applica 'on review. Owner designates 'Applicant' as indicated to act as owner's representative in all application sub ttals to this project. Applicant Owner (Print Name) (Print Name) Date ��0-sem i Date Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts Town District Planning Principles A. Districts Priority Classifications While the Goals and Policies of this plan generally apply to all areas of the Town, the system of district designations provides specific planning and urban design recommendations to distinct areas within the Town. The district descriptions and principles are a result of input from the community, intent of the landowners, and the existing development rights. As part of the comprehensive planning effort, the Steering Committee assessed the appropriateness of the previous district boundaries and made adjustments as necessary to ensure that each district still comprised a cohesive geographic entity. Then the committee conducted an evaluation of the districts to ensure that the planning guidance and implementation recommendations of the previous plan were still current and appropriate. The next step was to assign to each district one of three relative priority designations — High Priority, Medium Priority, or Static/Low Priority — based on the level of issues and/or changes confronting a particular district. The priority levels were assigned based on the recognition that the Town must prioritize where and how it expends its resources to most effectively realize the community vision within this plan. As a result, the Steering Committee produced a new map identifying the Town's districts and classifying each district by its priority level. The final step involved re-evaluating each district with emphasis on the high and medium priority areas in terms of the appropriateness of the district's role and specific Planning Principles given the context of this plan's Vision, Future Land Use Plan, Community Framework Plan, and Goals and Policies. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age I The heart of the community. Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts B. High Priority Districts The following districts are high priority for the Town: DIagmm mt to male. District 1: West Town Center District in The role of the West Town Center District is to serve as the heart of the community. Social, cultural, intellectual, political, and recreational gatherings occur in this district. In addition, the district acts as the common ground between the full-time residents, part-time residents, and destination guests through diverse retail and entertainment opportunities. The West Town Center District will be an intensely developed mixed use, pedestrian -oriented area that serves as the primary focus for residential and lodging development within the overall Town Center. Currently, this district provides a diverse mix of land uses in Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 2 Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts vertically mixed-use buildings. Uses include retail, office, residential, government services, civic facilities, and parks loosely grouped around a 50 -foot pedestrian mall right-of-way. In 2001, the Town completed a specific area master plan (Appendix A: Town Center Plan) for this district that articulated how the district could ensure Avon of a regional activity center. Create anew "Main Street" in the existing pedestrian mall { right-of-way. Realign West Benchmark Road to improve circulation in the area and enhance the development feasibility of vacant parcels. Link pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile circulation to and through Avon's Town Center, Nottingham Park, the Confluence site, and the Eagle River. Develop a multi -modal transit center. Develop a parking structure associated with the expansion of Avon's Recreation Center. Develop a mix of uses that provides a strong residential and lodging bed base supported by a mix of community and guest commercial uses. Create inviting storefronts with retail, restaurant, and entertainment uses on ground levels and offices, lodging, and residential uses above. Establish public plazas and other gathering spaces for community interaction. Provide entertainment opportunities for residents and guests to enliven the area and extend retail hours. Implement key recommendations such as the Main Street concept from the Town Center Plan. Use signage, streetscape design, landscaping, points of interest, and other wayfinding elements to help orient visitors to important destinations within the district and the larger Town Center. Use architectural detailing on ground level/first floor to Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 3 Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts Site buildings of various sizes along the street edge to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and break up building bulk. Develop a new transit center and privatetpublic structured parking facilities that provide easy access to and through the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 4 Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts Diagram not to mIc District 2. East Town Center District The East Town Center District is a key revitalization prospect for the community. Significant redevelopment opportunities exist in the district, and must be considered comprehensively with concern for the community's greatest needs and desires. This district also abuts the Village at Avon and its anticipated future development. Strong pedestrian and street connections should be established so that these districts create a consistent and cohesive community core. The size of the parcels provides an opportunity for a variety of redevelopment opportunities. The challenge will be to overcome the confusing streets, indirect pedestrian walkways, diminished sight corridors, and to entice people out of their car to experience the entire Town Center. A mix of uses, including major retail establishments, smaller retail shops, personal services, offices, and supporting residential/lodging uses will be essential for the district. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 5 A key revitalization prospect. Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts Develop a mix of commercial uses with supporting residential/lodging development. Implement a street pattern that functionally extends Main Street across Avon Road. Plan for public plazas and other community gathering plat Develop structured parking facilities to make parking less obtrusive to the pedestrian. Accommodate anchor retailers without large expanses of parking to ensure these uses are integrated into a unifying framework. Create a cohesive physical framework and community image (compatible building orientation, scale, massing, sitting, street alignments, streetscape furnishings, signage, lighting, etc.) between the Town and the Village at Avon. Use architecturally interesting detailing on ground level/first floor for enhanced pedestrian environment. Site buildings of varying sizes along the street to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and breakup building bulk. Ensure convenient pedestrian and auto access to the entire Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 6 Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts T w swk. Roundabout ®,., Gondola to Vehicular and Pedestrian Crossing Beaver Creek T Transit Center ® Redevelopment Opportunities District 3: Confluence District The Confluence District is the key community connector. Not only a place where a river and creek converge, the Confluence District represents one where roads, the railroad, regional trail, and future gondola brings the community together and enlivens the Town Center. The intent of the district is to facilitate an extension of the Town Center with a significant residential] lodging component, limited supporting commercial and services uses, and direct gondola access to Beaver Creek Village. The district is comprised largely of undeveloped land, with the exception of the wastewater treatment facility and employee housing. The district has direct access to the railroad right-of- way, the Eagle River, and Avon Road. The planning and development of this district must incorporate these three key assets. Recognize the Confluence District as the most valuable property in Town limits and should be developed at its most optimal level. Develop a mix of uses consisting of bed -base development with supporting commercial development. Create a vibrant mix of uses and creative use of open space Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 7 The key community connector. Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts Develop a state-of-the-art conveyance linking the Confluence District to Beaver Creek Village as the preferred alternative. Design architecture to be significant from all sides (no front or back). Parking areas, trash dumpsters, and loading or service areas should be screened and/or buffered from the river corridor and from U.S. Highway 6 to minimize impacts on the river corridor. Create a seamless vehicular and pedestrian connection to the Town Center. Preserve and enhance public access to the existing linear park along the riverbank. Connections from this path to both the Town Center and Nottingham Park must be created in an ecologically sensitive manner as a key natural amenity. Encourage preservation of trees in wetland areas. Encourage development efforts to minimize the loss of trees and impact to the riparian area while still achieving the urban design goals of this section. Use signage, streetscape design, building forms, landscaping, points of interest, and other wayfinding elements to help orient visitors to important destinations within the district and Town Center area. Provide for transit facilities between the Town Center and the Confluence in anticipation of a passenger train on the railroad ROW. Plan for public plazas and other gathering spaces for community interaction. a whitewater park to broaden the spectrum of Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 8 Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts ® Avon Road Showcase District 4: Avon Road Corridor The Avon Road District's role as a showcase for the best of Avon is derived from the part it plays in the experience of the community. Being the major connection between I-70 and Beaver Creek Resort, Avon Road is the first (and occasionally only) area many people see in the community. It is important that this generally vehicular experience is significant enough to peak the interest of the vehicle's occupants and get them out of their cars and into the Town Center. The artwork and immaculate landscaping helps this cause, but the surrounding architecture and streetscaping must also be affecting. Avon Road is the most traveled road in Avon, providing direct access to Avon's Town Center, I-70, U.S. Highway 6, and the Beaver Creek and Bachelor Gulch base areas. In 1997, the Town completed a major improvement of Avon Road that replaced all five signalized intersections with roundabouts and town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 9 A showcase for the best of Avon. Town District Planning Principles High Priority Districts significant streetscape enhancements. Though these improvements are widely recognized for reducing congestion, two significant challenges remain. First, the ease and speed at which vehicles traveling through Avon's Town Center area between the I-70 interchange and the entrance to Beaver Creek is such that travelers are not enticed to venture into the Town Center's two major mixed-use districts. The second issue is that Avon Road is a barrier for pedestrians attempting to walk within the Town Center between East and West Town Center Districts. Integrate Avon Road into the Town Center development efforts by incorporating wayfinding, pedestrian planning, and other streetscape enhancements to ensure that Avon Road provides a sense of arrival to the town core. Site buildings of various sizes along the street edge to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and break up building bulk. Reconfigure key parcels and/or redevelop older, underutilized buildings adjacent to Avon Road to fulfill the purpose. of the district as a showcase and to make them compatible with existing and future development in the We Town Center District. Use signage, streetscape design, landscaping, points of interest, and other wayfinding elements to help orient visitors and lead them toward important destinations within the district and Town Center. Create stronger pedestrian connections across Avon Road to fully integrate the Town Center and link the East and West Town Center Districts. Limit building heights fronting Avon Road to existing heights to avoid a canyon effect and to preserve Beaver Creek views. Continue and expand the use of Avon Road as a gallery for Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 10 Town District Planning Principles, Medium Priority Districts C. Medium Priority Districts The following Districts are deemed to present a medium priority for the Town. 0 Recreational Enhancements ® Civic Center Redevelopment OPassive Recreation Area Western anchor to Main Street m9ram not W sale District 5. Nottingham Park District The Nottingham Park District is Avon's cultural, civic, and recreational hub. Included in this district are Harry A. Nottingham Park, the municipal office complex, fire department, library, elementary school, and the Town's recreation center. The district functions as the center for community activities, such as the Town's Fourth of July celebration and various athletic tournaments. Good pedestrian circulation between the municipal center, the park, the Town Center, and adjacent residential uses exist, but will need to be enhanced to respond to key future developments in the West Town Center District and the Confluence District. Views and access into and from the Nottingham Park are key components to Avon's image and identity. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 11 Cultural, civic, and recreational hub. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts including amenities such as a performing arts pavilion, maintaining flexible space for temporary concession facilities, and providing a western anchor to the future Main Street. Create private, comfortable spaces along Buck Creek for passive activities as an alternative to the play fields and othe active spaces available within the rest of Nottingham Park. Use signage, streetscape design, landscaping, points of interest, artwork, and other wayfinding elements to help orient visitors to the district's various functions, the cultural and civic activity center, and toward important destinations within the Town Center area. Realign Benchmark Road perpendicular with the future Main Street per the Avon Town Center Plan and enhance th pedestrian connections between the municipal center and thi park. Preserve view corridors to Beaver Creek and the new Main Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 12 Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts © Community Gateway i Roundabout District 6: U.S. Highway 6 Gateway Corridor The U.S. Highway 6 Gateway Corridor is the community Gateway to Avon and identifies Avon's image. The area is characterized by: (1) the flat areas presently used for ski area parking, and high visibility from U.S. Highway 6; (2) the primary access to Beaver Creek; and (3) the Folsom/White property (The Gates Development) located on the south side of U.S. Highway 6. The undeveloped parcels currently serving as parking areas and other accessory uses for the Beaver Creek ski area present an important influence on development within the Town. Although these parcels are outside of Avon's municipal boundaries, the Town should be consulted on any proposed development on these parcels. This intersection of U.S. Highway 6 and Avon Road is a major gateway to the Town. As part of the Town's roundabout improvement project, this intersection was convened to a full roundabout with attractive landscaping and monumentation identifying both the Town and Beaver Creek. This corridor area also includes the Nottingham Station commercial area at the intersection of Hurd Lane and Avon Road. A pedestrian link is needed to connect this commercial area to the East Town Center District and the Confluence District. The Folsom/White property is intended to provide residential/lodging uses with supporting commercial and service uses at a scale appropriate to buildable area and directed to quests of development. The area is somewhat isolated from Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 13 The southern community gateway. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts other development within Avon due to its location on the south side of U.S. Highway 6. The area is characterized by steep terrain, with limited buildable areas directly adjacent to U.S. Highway 6. Enhance the U.S. Highway 6 right-of-way as a landscaped boulevard/parkway to provide a sense of arrival and departure for those traveling to and from Avon and to strengthen Avon's overall community image and identity. Limit development of south side of U.S. Highway 6 to guest service facilities near the Village Road intersection and to neighborhood supporting commercial near the Prater Lane intersection. Strengthen the association between the Town and Beaver Creek through compatible streetscape elements, efficient access, and cooperative visitor information center. Encourage screening of ski area parking areas and other accessory uses. Create strong pedestrian connections to the Confluence and the East Town Center Districts. Site buildings of various sizes (but smaller than those found in the West Town Center District) to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and break up building bulk. Minimize cut areas and preserve areas of steep slopes. Buildings should be built into the hillside and stepped up with rising topography to reduce their dominance above U.: Highway 6. Address access and parking at Nottingham Station. Ensure that access points in this district are compatible with surrounding districts. Consider buildable area when determining an appropriate scale and density for development. Encourage shared access when appropriate. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 14 d+¢+m,atbsde Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts ® vehicular and Pedestrian Crossing t—i Roundabout Screening District 7. Village at Avon West District The Village at Avon Village West District is a pedestrian - oriented mixed-use urban village with commercial, residential, lodging, educational, and culturallrecreational uses along with an ice-skating/events center. The site is characterized by good visibility from I-70, gentle topography, and proximity to the East Town Center District. In order to create a unified and cohesive framework and community image building and site development elements as well as public design elements such as street alignments, streetscape furnishings, signage, and lighting need to be coordinated between the Village at Avon developer and the Town. Create strong auto, bicycle, and pedestrian connections to the East Town Center District via both East Beaver Creek Boulevard and Chapel Place. Create a unified and cohesive physical framework and community image (compatible building orientation, scale, massing, street alignments, streetscape furnishings, signage, lighting, etc.) between the Village at Avon and the Town. Site buildings of various sizes (but smaller than those found in the West Town Center District) to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and break up building bulk. WTown of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 15 A pedestrian - oriented urban village. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts expanses Create inviting storefronts, public plazas, green spaces, and other gathering spaces for public interaction. Provide architecturally interesting detailing on ground level/first floor with elements such as canopies, overhangs, and sloped roofs. Provide well -lit, pleasant pedestrian access from parking structures to the public street and buildings. Encourage retail and restaurant uses on ground levels with offices, lodging, and residential above. Develop joint privatetpublic structured parking facilities. Buffer schools from commercial uses by surrounding with Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 16 Town District Planning Principles, Medium Priority Districts District 8: Village at Avon East District The Village at Avon East District is the region's commercial center. It is intended to provide the Village at Avon West District a residential medium density neighborhood with supporting commercial development, neighborhood -oriented commercial with supporting educational, recreational and service oriented uses just west of William J. Post Boulevard, and regional commercial uses associated with the I-70 and William J. Post Boulevard interchange. The site is characterized by gently sloping topography along the valley floor with steeper slopes rising up to I-70 Create a unified and cohesive physical framework and community image (compatible building orientation, scale, massing, street alignments, streetscape furnishings, signage, lighting, etc.) between the Village at Avon and the Town. Site buildings of various sizes (but smaller than those found in the West Town Center District) to maximize sun exposure, protect, views, and break up building bulk. Create a strong overall pedestrian -orientation with tree lined streets and walking paths. Screen large regional commercial uses from I-70 with trees and berms. the design of Beaver Creek Boulevard to include Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 17 The region's commercial center. High-quality residential neighborhood. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts �— st„pswoo ROWWab n a.>..inmvr. District 9: Village at Avon North Gateway District The Village at Avon North Gateway District is a high-quality residential neighborhood. It is intended to provide for residential development and a large community park. A new northern frontage road being developed through this district will provide an important east -west connector on the north side of I-70 linking William J. Post Boulevard and Avon Road. The district is highly visible from 1-70 and thus presents a strong influence on Avon's identity. It is essential that the currently planned uses of this region not be altered and that the commercial uses -by - right of RMF -I be strictly interpreted to those that are supportive of and justified by the needs of that community. Uses that require I-70 traffic to be financially viable are not contemplated by the allowed uses and will not be appropriate for the site. Additionally, the area will serve as the gateway to the Village at Avon Residential Northern Residential District. The existing Buffalo Ridge residential development is relatively isolated from other community commercial and service areas. The elevated topography on either side of I-70 offers the possibility to construct a pedestrian overpass that would directly link this area with the Village at Avon East and West Districts. Site buildings to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 18 Town District Planning Principles' Medium Priority Districts • Provide east -west pedestrian and bicycle routes. • Encourage additional informal landscaping of properties to soften the visual impact of the large structures. • Protect view corridors, ridgelines, and steep slopes from development. • Encourage quality architecture to provide a positive gateway experience to the community. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 19 The Town's eastern gateway. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts El smpslo cma.nmmv�. 77 District 10: Village at Avon Northeast The Village at Avon Northeast is the Town's eastern gateway. It is currently zoned for regionally oriented commercial, residential, and service-oriented uses and activities. The area is relatively flat located at the base of steeply sloping hillsides. There is limited access to the site, which has an impact on the type and intensity of development on the site. Develop site per approved Village at Avon PUD as regional commercial mediumthigh density residential and a community park. Explore ways of preserving all or part of the site for open space or park. Consider view of the site from I-70 when developing, and ensure that the site represents a suitable gateway to the Town. Site buildings to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and j break up building bulk. i Identify and preserve significant culturallheritage resources present on site. Maximize orientation to the river to provide connections and a potential riverfront park. I Provide access to site from U.S. Highway 6 with bridge Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 20 Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts Screening Steep Slopes ® Vehicular and Pedestrian Crossing ♦ + + ♦ `% + ` V' �� _% + +++. Potential 1-70 Underpass ♦ + ♦ Diagram rot to scale. District 11: Metcaff Road District The Metcalf Road District is the Town's industrial center. It provides light industrial and commercial service uses as well as accessory residential development. During redevelopment, long- term issues such as parking and access should be addressed. Existing light industrial uses on Nottingham and Metcalf Roads are intensely developed, with large buildings on small sites; generally with insufficient landscaping; unscreened parking, storage, and trash containers. The area's high visibility from I-70 makes it important to the Town's image. Concerns over traffic safety issues as well as the area's generally poor aesthetic characteristics are perceived as negatively affecting the image of the Wildridge and Wildwood residential developments located behind this area. Yet, it is also recognized that these businesses provide a critical component to Avon's overall economic health and sustainability. Opportunities should be encouraged to develop live/work developments that allow for light manufacture/industrial uses that do not possess significant conflicts with other surrounding land uses. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 21 The town's industrial center. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts Accommodate limited/accessory residential development that supports primary industrial/employment land uses. Develop a pedestrian and auto underpass under I-70 to link this area to West Beaver Creek Boulevard. Coordinate with CDOT to introduce trees on uphill slopes in the I-70 right-of-way and along Metcalf Road to partially screen buildings and other accessory uses. Require new development that minimizes significant re- grading, and provides for proper on-site parking and access. Require new development and encourage existing development to add architectural or landscape screening of storage areas, HVAC equipment, loading docks, and trash containers. Site buildings to maximize sun exposure, protect views, and break up building bulk. Add traffic lanes on Metcalf Road to accommodate truck traffic. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 22 uw.en.n�a. Town District Planning Principles; Medium Priority Districts ® redawncm„m9 N Bldgs District 12: Railroad Corridor The railroad corridor runs the length of Avon from east to west along the Eagle River and is the Town's greatest transit opportunity. Currently the railroad is not being used for rail traffic leaving the corridor effectively vacant. Regional transportation agencies/coalitions have made efforts to acquire the right-of-way in whole or in part in order to develop a regional transit and/or trails system, though the right-of-way's final disposition remains unknown. The I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and the Intermountain Connection Capital Investment Plan both indicate the corridor has merit as a mass transit and trail corridor. Nevertheless, the right-of-way corridor represents an important opportunity for Avon and its preservation and enhancement is recommended. The presence of the railroad tracks through Town creates a substantial north -south barrier through much of Avon. The Town has been successful in securing rights to construct an at - grade crossing for West Beaver Creek Boulevard, and recent approvals in other nearby locations for additional crossings seem to indicate an increased willingness on the part of the railroad company to allow such crossings. The rail corridor should be visually integrated into the Town. It should be considered a transportation corridor that is an integral component of Avon's overall structure and character. Ensure that the railroad right-of-way is preserved for future �Townof Avon Comprehensive Plan Town 23 The Town's greatest transit opportunity. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts Develop additional at -grade and above grade crossing toT better connect the Confluence River Front area and the Nottingham Station commercial area to the Town Center's mixed-use lodging and commercial areas. Work with Union Pacific to maintain railroad corridor, including mowing and weed mitigation. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 24 Town District Planning Principles,, Medium Priority Districts Bening District 13: Nottingham Road Commercial District This area's proximity to the I-70/Avon Road Interchange establishes its importance to the Town's identity. Development that occurs here should reflect the standards in the Town Center, but should not compete with downtown in terms of size of buildings or intensity of development. Limit access points on Nottingham Road to simplify traffic movements. Require landscape setbacks and internal landscaping of parking lots. Screen all equipment and storage areas from view. Limit building heights to that which is compatible with the surrounding development. Development intensity and activity should diminish going Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 25 A secondary commercial district. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts •F sleep slopes EF\ Y rY a r♦ •�,steep sbpes \ dyam mt�a sole. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 26 Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts `; Steep Slopes Dlagmm not to scale{{ Y.♦'!{ * YY {''{ Y•♦ `Y. +{ •{.• s {♦{ \\ {• { ,YY • i{ Y\ • •{ M1 { { e { { { . Y Y • { { • i District 14, 15, and 16: USFS Parcels Three parcels owned by the USFS are the Town's key open space. Although outside the Town boundary, these parcels are important to maintaining the desired character of Avon and to directing development to be consistent to the overall land use plan. The parcels meet USFS criteria for exchange to eliminate irregular boundaries or awkward configurations. Loss of any of these parcels to private ownership and development would eliminate valuable visual and physical buffers between and among developed areas of Town and would deprive our citizens of prized open space and natural habitats. Maintain these districts as open space with continuing USFS ownership by collaborating with the Agency to improve utilize and maintain them as low -impact public accessible regions. Use these partnerships to establish the public's values and desires with the USFS so that land swaps are unlikely to occur without Town concurrence. Pursue Town acquisition of these parcels for dedicated open space by working with the local and national land Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 27 The Town's key open space. ! ♦ { i Dlagmm not to scale{{ Y.♦'!{ * YY {''{ Y•♦ `Y. +{ •{.• s {♦{ \\ {• { ,YY • i{ Y\ • •{ M1 { { e { { { . Y Y • { { • i District 14, 15, and 16: USFS Parcels Three parcels owned by the USFS are the Town's key open space. Although outside the Town boundary, these parcels are important to maintaining the desired character of Avon and to directing development to be consistent to the overall land use plan. The parcels meet USFS criteria for exchange to eliminate irregular boundaries or awkward configurations. Loss of any of these parcels to private ownership and development would eliminate valuable visual and physical buffers between and among developed areas of Town and would deprive our citizens of prized open space and natural habitats. Maintain these districts as open space with continuing USFS ownership by collaborating with the Agency to improve utilize and maintain them as low -impact public accessible regions. Use these partnerships to establish the public's values and desires with the USFS so that land swaps are unlikely to occur without Town concurrence. Pursue Town acquisition of these parcels for dedicated open space by working with the local and national land Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 27 The Town's key open space. Town District Planning Principles Medium Priority Districts • Vigorously oppose any and all other possibledispositions oil the parcels by the USFS. I Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 28 Town District Planning Principles Low Priority Districts Low Priority Districts District 17: West Residential District The West Residential District is the western gateway to Town. Presently, the west residential district consists of the Aspens Mobile Home Park. In recent years, improvements to landscape treatments, fences, and general clean up have resulted in the area presenting itself as a vital, affordable neighborhood. The area has the potential to be redeveloped over time as a higher density, master -planned, affordable residential area. This could be considered in the long-term future of Avon when residential developments in the area reach capacity, and alternative solutions for housing are being sought. Those solutions should include pocket parks and enhanced pedestrian connectivity. Coordinate with CDOT to introduce low landforms and plantings (trees and shrubs) along the southern I-70 right-of- way to buffer the mobile home park from the interstate and light industrial uses across the interstate. In addition, the view from I-70 to the mobile home park will be screened while preserving views to downtown. Encourage continued improvements to the visual quality of the area. Limit building heights to three stories, and require developments to demonstrate preservation of views to the Town Center through the strategic placement of open space or the further limitation of building heights. the construction of a pocket park to service the District 18: River Residential District The River Residential District is a major local's residential area. Much of the river residential district has been developed, but future residential development that will occur along the river beyond the boundaries shown on the Urban Design Plan should be developed in accordance with the recommendations for this District. The major design influences are U.S. Highway 6, the riparian environment along the Eagle River, and public access to the river. Sensitive site planning, architectural detailing, and appropriate setbacks, color, and scale of structure should be used to preserve the character of the river and its associated natural habitat. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 29 Town District Planning Principles Low Priority Districts Encourage redevelopment to take into consideration the objectives of the Eagle River Watershed Management Plan including river setbacks and best practices for development in proximity to the river. Provide a public access easement, where appropriate, within building setback areas in new development adjacent to the Eagle River for public enjoyment of the river and construction of a public recreational trail. Provide public parking and signage at strategically located trailheads. Encourage the further enhancement of the ECO Trail. Buildings should be oriented to capitalize upon the Eagle River as an amenity. Parking areas, trash dumpsters, and other uses that could potentially disrupt the quality of the river environment should be located away from the river designed to have the least impact on the river corridor. Limit building height to a scale that is subordinate to the Town Center and compatible with the river environment. Plant indigenous trees and shrubs to screen existing large residential buildings along U.S. Highway 6 and provide landforms and landscaping between residences and U.S. Highway 6. Enhance the pedestrian experience by adding sidewalks along all roads on the valley floor. District 19: Nottingham Park Residential District Nottingham Park is bordered to the west, north, and northeast by existing high quality residential development. Provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists along West Beaver Creek Boulevard and adequate screening of parking and trash areas would help enhance the character of the area. Encourage existing development and require redevelopment to screen parking and trash areas with landscaping material. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 30 Town District Planning Principles! Low Priority Districts and character as existing development. .. __..._ District 20: Nottingham Road Residential District This district is characterized by limited developable area due to steep slopes to the north, frontage on Nottingham Road, which is classified as a commercial collector road, and high exposure to I- 70. Existing residential development is typically multi -family buildings with tasteful architecture. Encourage additional informal landscaping of existing properties to soften the visual impact of the large structures. Reseed exposed slopes with native grasses and wild flowers Require new development to provide a landscape buffer adjacent to Nottingham Road and I-70. Encourage redevelopment by offering incentives to District 21:1-70 Gateway The interchange on I-70 at Avon Road is the main gateway to the Town. A lighted gateway sign is suitably placed along the west bound off ramp to Avon. However, the gateway approach needs to be redesigned to further enhance the overall image of this gateway. The emphasis should be on the creation of a positive entry experience that extends the character of the Town Center to Avon's front door. Enhance the intersections at the on/off ramps on Avon Road to include streetscape improvements and special landscape features. District 22: Wildridge Residential District This area consists of a residential subdivision containing varying densities, located on the sunny, south -facing slopes north of the main valley floor. The character for the developed landscape should reflect the area's dry climate and typically steep terrain with low water -requiring plant materials and natural landscaping. Due to the limited amount of existing trees and shrubs and the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 31 Town District Planning Principles Low Priority Districts open character of the property, special care should be taken to ensure that all structures are compatible with one another and in harmony with the natural surroundings. Construct. bicycle lanes along Metcalf and Wildridge Roads. Consider a trail system through open space areas in Wildridge to provide alternatives to the roadways for pedestrian circulation. 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. Improve the intersection of Metcalf and Nottingham Roads, and implement the other recommendations for District 4 to enhance the entry to Wildridge. 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 District 23: Mountain Star Residential District This area is a planned unit development established in 1992, of large -lot, single-family homes, located east of Wildridge on the south -facing slopes north of the main valley floor. This covenant -controlled, gated community has its own design review committee. Prohibit significant alteration of natural environment and minimize stress on wildlife and loss of habitat. Consider the development of a trailhead to access the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 32 Town District Planning Principle Low Priority Districts District 24: Swift Gulch District The Town of Avon's Public Works and Transportation Departments are located in the Swift Gulch District. In response to the area's high visibility from I-70, efforts have been made to screen the existing buildings and facilities and to use materials and colors that blend with the surrounding hillsides. Encourage building at a scale that minimizes visibility from I-70. Require building materials and colors that blend in with the hillsides. Screen accessory uses with landforms and landscaping. District 25: Nottingham Statlon/Eaglebend District The Nottingham Station/Eaglebend District contains single- family and multi -family residential development. The area is mostly developed, with a few remaining individual residential lots still undeveloped. Design issues for development in this area are to address visibility from U.S. Highway 6, the protection and enhancement of the riparian environment along the Eagle River, and appropriate public access along the river. Examine the potential to develop pedestrian and bicycle connections between Stonebridge Drive and the Village at Avon Residential and Commercial Districts. Historic structures such as the Nottingham Ranch House and the water wheel should be evaluated. i Encourage development to take into consideration the objectives of the Eagle River Watershed Management Plan including river setbacks and best practices for development in proximity to the river. Provide a public access easement, where appropriate, within building setback areas in new development adjacent to the Eagle River for public enjoyment of the river and construction of a public recreational trail. Building should be oriented to capitalize upon the Eagle Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 33 4 Town District Planning Principles Low Priority Districts other uses that could potentially disrupt the quality of the river environment should be located away from the river and designed to have the least impact on the river corridor. Set buildings back from the river to preserve its natural character, and step building facades back away from the river to avoid creating a 'canyon effect'. Limit building height to a scale that is subordinate to the Town Center and compatible with the river environment. Buildings should be designed to step down in height as they near the river and in response to the natural topography. Encourage landforms,.landscaping and sidewalks between District 26. Village at Avon Northern Residential District This area is part of the Village at Avon P.U.D. of quality, large - lot, single-family homes and some multi -family residential development located on the south -facing slopes north of the main valley floor. This residential area is covenant -controlled, gated community with its own design review committee. This residential area has several provisions for public services and access ways that should be maintained. Further public access arrangements would be beneficial, including the preservation/ acquisition of public space located adjacent to this area. Encourage further public access arrangements including the preservation/ acquisition of public space located adjacent to this area. Prevent significant alteration of natural landscape as well as ridgeline and steep slope development. This area should be highly sensitive to visual impacts of improvements and District 27. Northern Hillside Open Space The Northern Hillside Open Space areas are comprised of the steep slopes of the valley wall north of I-70. These areas are protected from development with some limited informal recreational uses allowed. No further recommendations are made herein. Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Page 34 Town District Planning Princlples! Goals and Policies 11. Goals and Policies While district -specific Planning Principles have defined objectives for these areas, there are a number of overarching goals and policies that serve to provide the community direction in the following topic areas: • Regional Awareness • Urban Form • Land Uses • Economic Development • Housing • Transportation • Environment • Parks, Recreation, Trails and Open Space • Public Services, Facilities, Utilities and Government • Community Character Each topic area contains one or more goals and several specific policy objectives. Certain goals and policies are more specific and timelier than others are; however, all goals and policies contribute to the vision of the plan and its implementation. Finally, certain policies interrelate to several topic areas (such as policies that are relevant to both Land Use and Economic Development). Where this redundancy occurs, the policy will cross-reference other goals or policies accordingly. Town of Avon Comprehensive PlanVO N age 35 Town Oistrict Planning Principles Goals and Policies A. Regional Coordination Goal A.1: Collaborate with local jurisdictions and agencies to implement this L _plan. Policy A.1.1: Work with Eagle County, adjacent municipalities, and other quasi- governmental agencies on cooperative planning efforts, including joint planning agreements to govern review and action on development applications within the Town's 3 -mile planning area Policy A.1.1: Participate in agreements with Eagle County, adjacent municipalities, and other quasi - governmental agencies regarding joint use of facilities and revenue sharing. Policy A.1.2: Refer significant development submittals to appropriate agencies to ensure that regional issues are identified and considered as part of the public process. Policy A.1.3: Work with various entities, agencies, and organizations to coordinate efforts to address regional issues related to such topics as the railroad corridor, I-70, and other transportation related issues. B. Urban Form ,Goal B.1: Maintain a compact community form. Policy B.1.1: Enhance Avon's compact community form by targeting future medium and high-intensity development to infill locations within the Town Center that are readily accessible to and otherwise integrated with existing employment centers, retail areas, and transit service routes. Policy B.1.2: Locate uses that generate traffic near transit facilities or shared parking facilities to minimize automobile travel or re -parking multiple times within the same area. Policy B.1.3: Require that development in the Town Center be at a higher density and include vertically mixed uses. Policy B.1.4: Encourage redevelopment and revitalization of currently underdeveloped, outdated, rundown, or Mi Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Pap 36 Town District Planning Principles! Goals and Policies otherwise dysfunctional areas. Policy B.1.5: Continue to update and enhance the Avon land use regulations so that new development is subject to a thorough, rigorous set of development criteria Goal B.2: Provide a distinct physical and visual separation between Avon and its surrounding communities that respects and preserves the natural beauty of the surrounding mountains and the Eagle River valley. Policy 8.2.1: Inventory, analyze and prioritize lands adjacent to the developed portions of the Town, particularly developable open space, steep slopes, drainage corridors, ridgelines, river frontage and other environmentally sensitive areas, for possible acquisition and/or preservation as formal open space or for other public purposes in order to maintain Avon's visual identity. Policy B.2.2: Maintain the Eagle River as a valued resource and require new development and redevelopment to be compatible with the riparian environment. Policy B.2.3: Encourage cluster style development in areas of less density to promote creative and efficient site design, avoid impacts on environmental resources and augment designated open space. `Goal B.3: Ensure that annexations provide an overall benefit to the community and are in conformance with this plan's goals and policies. _ Policy B.3.1: Require all annexed lands to be master planned in conformance with the Future Land Use Plan and all existing design standards, and to clearly show physical, visual, and functional connections to existing development and Town facilities. Policy B.3.2: Participate in planning efforts related to lands outside the Town's corporate limits that may affect the Town by maintaining open communications with Eagle County and other jurisdictions and agencies. Policy B.3.3: Coordinate land use policies and regulations with Eagle County and other local jurisdictions to make development more consistent across political boundaries. Policy B.3.4: Ensure that the conditions stipulated in all Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 37 I C. Land Use Town District Planning Principles Goals and Policies annexation agreements, subdivision improvement agreements and other subsequent commitments between the Town and an annexor(s) clearly identify the intent and/or purpose of the future disposition or development of the annexed lands, provides a sufficient level of specificity to assure that the identified intent or purpose will be achieved, and provides sufficient assurance that the proposed annexation will support the Town's goals and policies and ultimately will benefit both existing and future Town residents alike. Provide a balance of land uses that offer a range of housing options, diverse commercial and employment opportunities, inviting guest accommodations, and high quality civic and recreational facilities that work in concert to strengthen Avon's identity as both a year-round residential community and as a Policy C.1.1: Ensure that proposed development and redevelopment projects conform to the Future Land Use Plan's designations and are of a scale and intensity as appropriate for the planning district in which they are located. Policy C.1.2: Ensure each development contributes to the jobs/housing balance in the Town and surrounding area. Policy C.1.3: Focus lodging and guest accommodation in the Town Center to take advantage of the proximity to retail, commercial and other community services. Policy C.1.4: Encourage the development of detailed District Master Plans for each District. Once written, immediate action should be taken to provide clear and simple zoning that would allow the type of development approved in the District Master Plan. Policy C.1.5: Where no District Master Plan has been prepared flexible zoning such as Planned Unit Development should be considered as an alternative to straight zoning if it would allow a more efficient development pattern. However, such flexible zoning will only be allowed where it provides a benefit to the community, is consistent with this comprehensive plan, and is compatible with surrounding development. Variations from standard `R" Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan R� O N Pap 38 r 6 " r Town District Planning Principles Goals and Policies zoning will be permitted only as needed to achieve effective development and a clearly demonstrated community benefit. Policy C.1.6: Include sufficient land for public uses such as schools, community facilities (such as childcare), and government services near the people who use them. Policy C.1.7: Encourage home occupations where appropriate to reduce traffic/commuting impacts in the community. Policy C.1.8: Encourage development applicants to meet with adjacent residents, businesses, and property owners. This will allow applicants to identify concerns and propose strategies for addressing them. Policy C.1.9: Require proposed development near the railroad corridor, particularly in the Town Center, to anticipate future transit and incorporate this potential into building and site design. (Refer to Policy C.3.4) Goal C:2: Use mixed-use development to create a more balanced, L sustainable system of land uses. Policy C.2.1: Require vertical and/or horizontal mixed-use development to occur in those areas identified in the Future Land Use Plan for mixed-use to enhance the Town's ability to respond to changing market conditions. Policy C.2.2: Require retail for a prescribed minimum depth of 25 feet along streets in the Town Center to ensure an active street frontage and appropriate mix of uses. Policy C.2.3: Provide opportunities for temporary office and service uses in ground floor retail space when market demand is low. Goal C.3: Ensure that Avon continues to develop as a community of safe, Interactive, and cohesive neighborhoods that contribute to the Town's overall character and image. Policy C.3.1: Promote a wide range of residential uses including large -lot single family and duplex, small -lot single family and duplex, multifamily, and vertically integrated residential (housing on the upper floors of mixed-use commercial buildings). Policy C.3.2: Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan age 39 Require new residential development to provide a 4 t. V Town District Planning Principles Goals and Policies variety of housing densities, styles, and price ranges based upon the findings of a housing needs assessment study. (Refer to Policy E.1.2.) Policy C.3.3: Require pedestrian, bike, and automobile connections, where appropriate, between proposed and existing residential neighborhoods. The use of multiple access connections, traffic calming devices, and/or street design standards will be employed to minimize cut through traffic. Goal C.4: Encourage sustainable commercial development that enhances Avon's overall economic health, contributes to the community's image and character, and provides residents and visitors increased with choices and services. Policy C.4.1: Develop a district plan for the East Town Center District identifying parcel configurations and new automobile and pedestrian circulation alignments to increase the district's viability. Policy C.4.2: Require future commercial businesses, where appropriate, to cluster buildings and to provide publicly accessible amenities. Policy C.4.3: Encourage neighborhood retail and service activities in locations that are convenient to residential neighborhoods. Require such development to provide pedestrian connections to adjacent development and to existing and proposed trail systems. Goal C.5: Encourage the redevelopment of existing light industrial and manufacturing uses to conform to existing plans and design standards. Policy C.5.1: Service commercial and light industrial uses, including warehousing and light manufacturing, should be designed to support effective vehicular access and circulation and allow effective screening from adjacent uses and public ways. Policy C.5.2: Permit accessory residential uses in association with light industrial commercial development when compatible. Policy C.5.3: Require adequate infrastructure improvements including safe access, utilities and controlled access from collectors. A` Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan Rm Page 40 MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FROM: TOWN ATTORNEY RE: ORDINANCE NO. 05-08 (RELATING TO DEFINITIONS OF LODGE AND DWELLING AND AMENDING THE WILDRIGE PUD) DATE: JULY 27, 2005 At a recent meeting of the Town Council, there were complaints by the public regarding use of a residence at 5350 Ferret Lane in Wildridge for short term rental to large groups of people. Persons at the meeting described problems with noise, parking and trash. Review of the Town's sales tax records confirmed that the owner of that residence had remitted substantial amounts of accommodation taxes to the Town. Town staff located a website for the property as well as for other properties being similarly rented out. Also, council members expressed their own awareness that properties in Wildridge are rented out short term. There was a consensus of the Council that renting to small groups was acceptable but that renting to large groups so as to cause noise, trash and parking problems needed to be addressed. Ordinance No. 05-08, a copy of which is included in your packet and which has been posted for public hearing, was adopted by the Council at their meeting on July 12. The purpose of this ordinance was to correct the particular problem identified, that the definition of "lodge" contained on the Wildridge plat and in the Town code does not address the problem presented by a single-family dwelling which is short -termed to large groups of people. At the time of the adoption of the ordinance, council members made several suggestions of changes, which have now been incorporated into a second draft of the ordinance. That second draft, with the changes shown, is also included in your packet. The recitals of the ordinance recite the problem identified by Council: 1. Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined, and Section 17.08.380, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Hotel, Motel, and Lodge" as "a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, intended for temporary occupancy of guests." Because the Code defines "accommodation unit" as "a room or group of rooms, without a kitchen," "hotel, motel and lodge" are lumped together as a hotel type use without any distinction among them. 2. There is no definition in the zoning title of the Code which encompasses the type of use complained of, a ski lodge type use where large groups of people are housed in a dwelling unit with common kitchen and dining facilities. "Motel" is not even otherwise used in the zoning title (except in the definition of "dwelling," which is why that definition is amended). 3. The final subdivision plat of the Wildridge planned unit development, recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, defines "Dwelling Unit" as not to include "Hotels, Lodge Units.... or similar units." Particularly with the addition of "or similar units," the Wildridge plat is ambiguous as to whether short-term rentals were and are permitted in residential areas. To correct the deficiencies of the Code and the ambiguity of the Wildridge plat, the ordinance limits accommodation facilities to two types, the hotel and the lodge. The hotel, at least as it is presently defined, is comprised of three or more accommodation units, i.e., rooms without cooking facilities. A lodge, on the other hand, is now defined as a short term rental facility with common kitchen and dining areas. The ordinance also incorporates the new definition into the Wildridge plat to resolve the ambiguity of the present definition. The dividing line of six persons, with more than that causing the facility to be a lodge, is a starting point which particularly needs your input. That number was intended to allow less intensive rentals. My recommendation is that you recommend to the Council the adoption of Ordinance No. 05-08 with the changes indicated in the revised ordinances and such other changes as you deem appropriate. As I have said, the Council is particularly looking to you to make a recommendation as to the threshold number to be used to trigger the definition of "lodge." It is hoped that the Council will be able to have second reading of the ordinance at their next meeting on August 9. Staff will also appreciate alternative solutions for future review. Ordinance No. 05- 08 is intended to address a particular problem. It may not be the best long term solution. JWD:ipse TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 05-09 SERIES OF 2005 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 05-08 TO TOWN COUNCIL, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17.08, MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF AVON, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "LODGE" AND "DWELLING" AND AMENDING THE WILDRIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined "Dwelling" as "not including hotels, lodge units... or similar units'; and WHEREAS, Section 17.08.230, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Dwelling" as "not including hotel, motel and lodge units"; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined, and Section 17.08.380, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Hotel, Motel, and Lodge" as "a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, intended for temporary occupancy of guests; and WHEREAS, "motels" are not permitted as a use within any zone district within the Town; and WHEREAS, the final subdivision plat of the Wildridge planned unit development ("PUD"), recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, defines "Dwelling Unit" as not to include "Hotels, Lodge Units, ... or similar units'; and WHEREAS, the Wildridge subdivision is predominantly residential and was not intended to include "lodges," as that term is commonly defined and understood; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that "lodges" or "lodge units" ought to be defined as "a dwelling occupied by more than six (6) paying guests on a temporary (thirty-one (3 1) days or less) basis" so as to clarify the original intent of the Wildridge PUD; and F..*W10 ring&Zoning Comma 1onlResofudom12005Wes 05.09 Zoning WildridgeAwndwntr.doc WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that "lodge" or "lodge unit," as so defined, is similar to the uses otherwise prohibited by the Wildridge PUD and therefore not permitted as a use within the Wildridge subdivision since its approval; and WHEREAS, a "lodge" or "lodge unit," as so defined, located in a residential neighborhood, is a nuisance in that such a use tends to cause excessive noise, parking problems and the accumulation of trash; and WHEREAS, amendment of the Avon Municipal Code to incorporate that definition of "lodge" promotes consistency and is in the best interest of the residents of the Town of Avon as a whole; WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the attached revisions ("Exhibit A") to the Wildridge PUD and the Town of Avon Zoning Code, and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has held a public hearing as required by the Avon Municipal Code to review the proposed amendments; WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission is appointed by Town Council to review, make recommendations, and render decisions on all zoning applications; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends to the Town Council the approval of Ordinance 05-08 Series of 2005. ADOPTED THIS 2nd DAY OF AUGUST, 2005 Signed: Chris Evans, Chair Attest: Phil Struve, Secretary Date: Date: F..IPlanning & Zoning Commi lonlResoludom12 O Rcs 05.09 Zoning 01drldge Amendments.doc ORDINANCE NO. 05-08 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17.08, MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE TOWN OF AVON, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF "LODGE" AND "DWELLING" AND AMENDING THE WILDRIDGE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined "Dwelling" as "not including hotels, lodge units ... or similar units"; and WHEREAS, Section 17.08.230, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Dwelling" as "not including hotel, motel and lodge units"; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 79-12, finally adopted June 5, 1979, defined, and Section 17.08.380, Avon Municipal Code, now defines "Hotel, Motel, and Lodge" as "a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, intended for temporary occupancy of guests; and WHEREAS, "motels" are not permitted as a use within any zone district within the Town; and WHEREAS, the final subdivision plat of the Wildridge planned unit development ("PUD'7, recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, defines "Dwelling Unit" as not to include "Hotels, Lodge Units.... or similar units"; and WHEREAS, the Wildridge subdivision is predominantly residential and was not intended to include `lodges," as that term is commonly defined and understood; and WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that `lodges" or `lodge units" ought to be defined as "a dwelling occupied by more than six (G) paying guests ODA.. ..•• Deleted: io�&d ro.dK temp0mrX(thirty-one (31) days or less) basil. so as to clarify the original intent of theDeleted: ocmi;=cy ; an Wildridge PUDd :.- g Deleted: ofmort dua six (d) guess WHEREAS, the Town Council finds and determines that `lodge" or `lodge unit," as so defined, is similar to the uses otherwise prohibited by the Wildridge PUD and therefore not permitted as a use within the Wildridge subdivision since its approval; and WHEREAS, a "lodge" or "lodge unit," as so defined, located in a residential neighborhood, is a nuisance in that such a use tends to cause excessive noise, parking problems and the accumulation of trash; and ,WHEREAS, amendment of the Avon Municipal Code to incorporate that . •- Deleted: I definition of"lodge"promotes consistency and is in the best interest of the residents of the Town of Avon as a whole; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF AVON, COLORADO: Section I. Amendment. Section 17.08.230, Chapter 17.08 of Title 17, Avon Municipal Code, is amended to provide as follows: Dwelling means a building or portion thereof used for residential purposes, including single-family, duplex and multifamily dwellings, but not including hotel or lodge units Section 1. Amendment. Section 17.08.380, Chapter 17.08 of Title 17, Avon Municipal Code, is amended by deletion of "motel and lodge" from the section title and to provide as follows: Hotel means a building containing three (3) or more accommodation units, may consist of an otnce, laundry tacumes used by the occupants, recreation facilities, a lobby or lounge, kitchen and dining facilities and similar accessory uses commonly found in association with a commercial hotel operation and meeting the requirements of the particular zone district in which the building is located. Section 2. Amendment. Chapter 17.08 of Title 17, Avon Municipal Code, is amended by the addition of a new Section 17.08.385 to provide as follows: Lodge means a building containing common kitchen and dining facilities or less) basis. but not Section 3. Amendment. The Wildridge planned unit development ("PUD"), as approved by the subdivision plat recorded October 8, 1981, in Book 330 at Page 78, Eagle County records, is amended by the incorporation by reference of the definition contained in Section 2 hereof. Section 4. Applicability. This ordinance shall apply to both existing and future buildings within the Town of Avon. Deleted: intended far the Delete: occupanry Deleted: otm d=th(6)go6C INTRODUCED, APPROVED, PASSED ON FIRST READING AND ORDERED POSTED the 12th day of July, 2005, referred for recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and a public hearing on this ordinance shall be held at the regular meeting of the Town Council on the 91h day of August, 2005, at 5:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk INTRODUCED, FINALLY APPROVED, PASSED ON SECOND READING AND ORDERED POSTED the 9th day of August, 2005. Ronald C. Wolfe, Mayor ATTEST: Patty McKenny, Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: John W. Dunn, Town Attorney