Loading...
PZC Packet 020706Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission �Meeting Y IN February 7, 2006 C 0 L 0 R A 0 0 Meetings Held At: Avon Town Council Chambers Meetings are open to the public Avon Municipal Building / 400 Benchmark Road 12:00pm-12:30pm Site Tour I ract Y. Mtn Star Subdivision Fitino No. 3 - 0382 Metcalf Road On-site review of existing site conditions for agenda items VIII, IX and X. The proposed building locations for this sketch design review will be staked for Commissioner review by the applicant. 5:00 - 5:30 pm Work Session Discussion of Regular Meeting Agenda Items in Council Chambers. Open to the Public. - REGULAR MEETING AGENDA - I. Call to Order: 5:30 pm II. Roll Call III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda IV. Conflicts of Interest V. Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the January 17, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes. VI. Riverfront Subdivision Minimum Design Standards Review (5:35pm - 6:00pm) Property Location: Confluence PUD/95 Avon Road Applicant: East West Resorts /Owner. Vail Associates Description: A request for an amendment to the Confluence PUD to modify the existing development rights and zoning for the entire property was forwarded by the Commission to Town Council on January 17, 2006. The recommended approval requested that minimum architectural design standards be submitted to the Commission and, after review, be forwarded to Town Council and incorporated into the PUD Development plan. The Commission will review the first draft of proposed design standards. VII. Final Design Plan (6:00pm - 6:30pm) Property Location: Lot 10, Block 3, Wildridge Subdvision/4010 Wildridge Road West Applicant: Daniel Ritsch Description: The applicant is proposing a Final Design application for a 9,400 square foot duplex residence on the subject property. The property is a relatively steep uphill lot located at the intersection of Bear Trap and Wildridge Road. The proposed materials include stone veneer, cedar siding, and asphalt shingles. VIII. Parking Variance (6:30pm - 6:45pm) PUBLIC HEARING Property Location: Tract Y, Mountain Star, Filing 3 / 0382 Metcalf Road Posted on February 3, 2006 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: Mark Donaldson /Owners: ARI of Avon, LLC Description: A request for a Variance from section 17.24.020-11 (b) of the Avon Municipal Code, to reduce (from 1/800 GFA to 1/1300 GFA) the parking required for a self -storage land use. Additionally, relief is being sought from section 17.24.030 of the Municipal Code to eliminate the requirement for more than one 12'x 35' loading berth for self -storage and warehousing land uses. This application is being reviewed concurrently with a Special Review Use application as well as a sketch design plan review. The applicant has requested that this agenda item be tabled until a later meeting date. IX. Special Review Use Application - Caretaker Unit (6:45pm - 7:OOpm) PUBLIC HEARING Property Location: Tract Y, Mountain Star, Filing 3 / 0382 Metcalf Road Applicant: Mark Donaldson /Owners: ARI of Avon, LLC Description: A request for a Special Review Use Permit, pursuant to section 17.20.010 (c) of the Avon Municipal Code, to establish one residential caretaker unit on the subject property. Up to four (4) accessory apartments are allowed in this zone district, if approved with a Special Review Use permit. X. Sketch Design Plan - Industrial/Commercial (7:OOpm - 7:30pm) Property Location: Tract Y, Mountain Star, Filing 3 / 0382 Metcalf Road Applicant: Mark Donaldson /Owners: ARI of Avon, LLC Description: The applicant is proposing this sketch plan review for two buildings on Metcalf Road. This application is being reviewed in conjunction with the above agenda items IX and X. The project proposes a mixture of vertically mixed "I/C" and self -storage land uses. The buildings are constructed primarily with precast concrete siding and EIFS materials. XI. Special Review Use Application - Tree Sales (6:45pm - 7:OOpm) PUBLIC HEARING Property Location: Lots 3 & 6 McGrady Acres Subdivision / 86 & 95 Nottingham Ranch Road Applicant: Paul Doughty /Owners: Traer Creek, LLC - Magnus Lindholm Description: A request for a Special Review Use Permit, pursuant to Section 17.48.020B of the Avon Municipal Code, to establish a landscaping nursery for retail sales in the McGrady Acres Subdivision off Post Boulevard. Staff is requesting that this item be tabled until the March 7, 2006 Commission meeting. Additional information has been requested from the applicants in order to review this application. XII. Other Business (7:00pm - 7:05pm) XIII. Adjourn (7:05pm) Posted on February 3, 2006 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 hfto://www.avon.ora / Please call (970) 748.4030 for directions Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting ATVN Minutes C O L ORA D5 January 17, 2006 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:40 pm. II. Roll Call All Commissioners were in attendance. 111. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda There were no additions and amendments to the Agenda. IV. Conflicts of Interest There were no conflicts of interest to report. V. Consent Agenda: • Approval of the December 6, 2005, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes and the December 20, 2005, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Commissioner Savage motioned for the approval of the Minutes from the December 6 and December 20, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission Meetings; Commissioner Green seconded and the motion passed unanimously. VI. PUD Amendment / Confluence - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Property Location: Confluence/95 Avon Road Applicant: East West Resorts /Owner: Vail Associates Description: A request for an amendment to the Confluence PUD to modify the existing development rights and zoning for the entire property. This application proposes a hotel, retail plaza, high-speed public gondola, condominiums, and fractional ownership residential units. This item is tabled until the January 3, 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Tambi Katieb presented the Staff Report to the Commission in summary, noting the areas of review in each attached staff report from the last three staff reports over the review of the project over six months, and reviewed the basis for staff recommendation of conditional approval. Staff recommended that the applicant review the final proposal and the PUD Development Plan, and that staff would then review each recommended condition and what it was intended to address in the proposal. This meeting was to be a review of the final refinements of the PUD and the PUD Development Plan, the guiding document for the project. Chuck Madison, East West Partners, approached the podium to discuss the project and began by describing the project's evolution, and what areas have been refined through the Planning & Zoning Commission and staff review process. He reviewed the benefits of the proposed gondola and the proposed hotel to the Town. He continued that the tract of land by the river would be deeded to the Town for open space and a riverfront park. Mr. Madison continued that the bike path would be widened to 12 feet from its current 10 -foot width and that a permanent easement would be established for public access to the gondola and to maintain the view corridor. He continued with the proposed improvement to Avon Road by eliminating the large retaining wall, creating additional bike access to Benchmark Road, and economic benefits of the project to the Town of Avon. Mr. Madison discussed the changes made to the project through the Planning and Zoning Commission process that included the enhancement of the architecture of the hotel by adjustments to height and massing. Building heights were detailed in the presentation, river setback was increased to 75 feet from 50 feet, and site coverage change from the original PUD was changed from 75% to 20% on the site and pedestrian access was improved. Mr. Madison continued that parking for the public was increased by 6 and there was better connectivity of the bike path on the site. Cul de sacs would permit access should railroad reactivate. Mr. Madison concluded his presentation and overall project review. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING The Commission opened the public hearing. Peter Buckley, Avon registered voter and taxpayer, questioned the kayak put -in and take-out at the proposed Whitewater Park, the PUC final decision, and the number and cost of parking for the public on the site. Mr. Madison responded it was the intent to provide public access for the purpose of kayaking, and described the public parking available to guests of the project and trail users. Mr. Katieb answered a Commission question that a final PUC decision should be made within the next three months or so, and Mr. Madison shared that the cost of parking has not been decided as yet but that there might be charges during the winter season and it might be free during off season. Tambi Katieb began the discussion of the recommendations of the Staff Report, describing the areas that each condition was intended to address in three general areas of the PUD Development Plan, which represents the guiding land use document for the project. Condition #1 dealt with the language of the PUD Development Notes regarding General Notes #7a, 7b, and 7c and the need for clarification based on what staff wished to see preserved in the view corridor. Commissioner Buckner questioned the gondola in the view corridor and Mr. Katieb responded that it was an acceptable encroachment for the benefit of the public to identify and have visible for access. Discussion was had on the exact width, and staff and the Commission found that a 55 -foot corridor was acceptable and allowed for a planned break in the wall plane for the hotel. Condition #1b was discussed and after deliberation the condition was revised. Commissioner Evans queried the two Starwood Real Estate offices and Mr. Madison responded that one was a temporary office and would be abandoned when the office in the Time Share building was CO'd and that there would be no more than two real estate offices operational at the public plaza. Linear square footage of commercial retail and parking were discussed in length. The Commission and staff were presented a scheme that showed exact locations of a SSF and SMV realty office and wished to limit the locations of all offices on the public plaza. Mr. Katieb noted that this was intended to enhance a place -making experience. Condition #1C was discussed, and after deliberation, was deleted since the plaza would be platted and the view corridor was resolved already. Mr. Katieb clarified a staff request for language on Condition#1 D and discussed the solar access study goals of #1 E. Condition #1F was discussed, and the building heights were tied to the development plan and final approval of the design standards. Staff had no objection to this approach if the heights were finally approved through the design standards and the design review approval process to the satisfaction of the Commission. Staff discussed the goal of the design standards and all were in agreement on this recommendation (#1 G). Condition #2 addressed parking concerns, which included setting an inappropriate precedent of parking spaces; too little parking would create unhappy owners, and the Commission felt the impact of the parking did not impact the town as it would the Confluence site, and office parking should be under the commercial category since the ratio was higher than the Municipal code requirements. Mr. Madison commented that it would be a $3 million cost for additional parking under the water table. Staff discussed the greatest variation by use and after further Commission comment, the parking conditions were deleted. Conversation continued with the "covenant" word issue and its financial impact to East West Resorts. Mr. Katieb relayed it was a concern for the Town's attorney to review and deferred comment. Condition #3 addressed General Conditions and conversation included Water Rights, Master Landscaping Plan, parcels to be deeded to the Town and other items to provide a clean PUD Development Plan. Norm Wood discussed Water Rights with the Commission and revealed that Town Council would address this issue, and both Conditions #3a and #3b were requested for deletion by staff. Mr. Madison questioned the timing of the construction of the cul-de-sacs. The rest of the conditions were reviewed by staff and there were no questions. Commissioner Green requested the addition of conditions to add incentive to allowing more commercial in the future and revising General Note 12 on the PUD Plan. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Savage moved to approve Resolution No. 06-02 recommending approval of the Subdivision Variances and Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Riverfront Subdivision in conjunction with the Confluence PUD Amendment as more specifically described in the Application dated August 8, 2005, with the following changes and conditions: Required revisions to the Development Plan: A. Delete General Notes 7a, 7b, and 7c, and revise as follows: "A fifty-five (55) foot view corridor through the public plaza adjacent to the proposed hotel as presented on the development plan and the final plat for the Riverfront Subdivision shall remain unobstructed from the ground level upwards, with the exception of the gondola terminal. Minor encroachments such as awnings, landscaping, overhangs, decks and railings shall be reviewed and may be approved through the design review approval process". B. Delete General Note #1 and revise as follows: Professional offices, including real estate offices, shall be limited to the two locations on the public plaza as depicted to the Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2006. A temporary timeshare sales office will be permitted in the hotel and must be vacated within thirty (30) days of issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Building E (Lot 3). No other plaza level spaces are permitted for use by professional and general office, including financial institutions and real estate offices or residential units. C. Add the following general note: 'This PUD Plan contains the development standards and uses for the Riverfront PUD. Other uses and provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code not specifically addressed herein, or in the related development agreement, shall apply to the Riverfront PUD." D. Add the following note: A solar access study showing the effects of shading on adjacent buildings and outdoor spaces is required for all proposed buildings exceeding 3 stories in height. Sun studies should be prepared on a site plan of a scale not less than 1 "=40' showing shadows at 10 am and 3pm on March 21, June 21, September 21, and December 21. E. The maximum building height shall be as follows: i. Hotel, Timeshare and Whole Ownership- as depicted on Land Use Table of PUD Development Plan dated January 12, 2006. ii. In all instances, the maximum allowable percentage of a building ridgeline to be at or near the maximum height shall be governed by the more restrictive criteria of the Riverfront Desion Standards and the Town of Avon Desian Review Guidelines. F. Final approval of this PUD Development plan is conditioned upon approval of site specific design standards ("Riverfront Design Standards") by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council, incorporated on the PUD Development Plan and recorded at the time of approval of the PUD. The criteria, at a minimum, shall include design elements as outlined in Exhibit A to Resolution 06- 01. 2. Parking Conditions: A. Delete General Note #8 and revise as follows: "A parking management plan, generally consistent with recommendations outlined in the Walker Preliminary Parking Operations Plan dated December 5, 2005 shall be submitted and, after review and approval by the Zoning Administrator, be recorded as a covenant with by issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The approved plan shall not be changed without notification of the Town, and shall be enforceable by the Zoning Administrator". 3. General Conditions: A. Water Rights: The property owner shall convey to the Town the water rights necessary to serve the approved development. Final water right determination shall be resolved between the property owner and the Town prior to the recording of a Final Plat. B. Revise General Note #10 to add the following: Additional Commercial GLFA exceeding the PUD maximum may be approved for restaurant, bars, cocktail lounges and similar uses subject to a Special Review Use. C. Revise General Note #12 to: Office space above but not on the public plaza level may be converted to Residential/Lodging uses provided the maximum number of Dwelling Units is not exceeded after such conversion. Required parking shall be recalculated after taking into account such conversion and any excess parking spaces may then be individually deeded. D. The property owner shall submit a master landscaping and public plaza design plan for Lots 1-7, including Tract A, to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to issuance of the first building permit for the hotel. E. Tract "A" shall be deeded to the Town and zoned "Open Space, Landscaping and Drainage" in accordance with section 17.20.120 of the Municipal Code prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy but no later than January 1, 2008. F. The Affordable Housing requirement shall be determined by Council if amended from the existing 10% requirement. G. The property owner shall construct the proposed Westin Hotel or equivalent, Public Plaza, and gondola as generally submitted in the August 3, 2005 application. Significant changes to the hotel brand or brand equivalent, public plaza, conceptual architectural illustrations or conveyance to the Beaver Creek Landing shall require a major amendment to the PUD. H. A revised development agreement shall incorporate and reference the approved PUD Development Plan, including all conditions of approval specified in Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 06-01. I. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. Commissioner Struve seconded the motion. All commissioners were in favor and the motion passed 7— 0. XI. Other Business A. Tambi Katieb revealed to the Commission the hiring of a GIS Planning Analyst to the Community Development Department. VIII. Adjourn Commissioner Savage motioned to adjourn. All Commissioners were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Ruth Weiss Recording Secretary APPROVED: Chris Evans Chairman Phil Struve Secretary Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting i/ AVON Minutes C a L U R A UO January 17, 2006 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:40 pm. II. Roll Call All Commissioners were in attendance. III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda There were no additions and amendments to the Agenda. IV. Conflicts of Interest There were no conflicts of interest to report. V. Consent Agenda: • Approval of the December 6, 2005, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes and the December 20, 2005, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Commissioner Savage motioned for the approval of the Minutes from the December 6 and December 20, 2005 Planning and Zoning Commission Meetings; Commissioner Green seconded and the motion passed unanimously. VI. PUD Amendment / Confluence - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Property Location: Confluence/95 Avon Road Applicant: East West Resorts /Owner: Vail Associates Description: A request for an amendment to the Confluence PUD to modify the existing development rights and zoning for the entire property. This application proposes a hotel, retail plaza, high-speed public gondola, condominiums, and fractional ownership residential units. This item is tabled until the January 3, 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Tambi Katieb presented the Staff Report to the Commission in summary, noting the areas of review in each attached staff report from the last three staff reports over the review of the project over six months, and reviewed the basis for staff recommendation of conditional approval. Staff recommended that the applicant review the final proposal and the PUD Development Plan, and that staff would then review each recommended condition and what it was intended to address in the proposal. This meeting was to be a review of the final refinements of the PUD and the PUD Development Plan, the guiding document for the project. Chuck Madison, East West Partners, approached the podium to discuss the project and began by describing the project's evolution, and what areas have been refined through the Planning & Zoning Commission and staff review process. He reviewed the benefits of the proposed gondola and the proposed hotel to the Town. He continued that the tract of land by the river would be deeded to the Town for open space and a riverfront park. Mr. Madison continued that the bike path would be widened to 12 feet from its current 10 -foot width and that a permanent easement would be established for public access to the gondola and to maintain the view corridor. He continued with the proposed improvement to Avon Road by eliminating the large retaining wall, creating additional bike access to Benchmark Road, and economic benefits of the project to the Town of Avon. Mr. Madison discussed the changes made to the project through the Planning and Zoning Commission process that included the enhancement of the architecture of the hotel by adjustments to height and massing. Building heights were detailed in the presentation, river setback was increased to 75 feet from 50 feet, and site coverage change from the original PUD was changed from 75% to 20% on the site and pedestrian access was improved. Mr. Madison continued that parking for the public was increased by 6 and there was better connectivity of the bike path on the site. Cul de sacs would permit access should railroad reactivate. Mr. Madison concluded his presentation and overall project review. OPEN PUBLIC HEARING The Commission opened the public hearing. Peter Buckley, Avon registered voter and taxpayer, questioned the kayak put -in and take-out at the proposed Whitewater Park, the PUC final decision, and the number and cost of parking for the public on the site. Mr. Madison responded it was the intent to provide public access for the purpose of kayaking, and described the public parking available to guests of the project and trail users. Mr. Katieb answered a Commission question that a final PUC decision should be made within the next three months or so, and Mr. Madison shared that the cost of parking has not been decided as yet but that there might be charges during the winter season and it might be free during off season. Tambi Katieb began the discussion of the recommendations of the Staff Report, describing the areas that each condition was intended to address in three general areas of the PUD Development Plan, which represents the guiding land use document for the project. Condition #1 dealt with the language of the PUD Development Notes regarding General Notes #7a, 7b, and 7c and the need for clarification based on what staff wished to see preserved in the view corridor. Commissioner Buckner questioned the gondola in the view corridor and Mr. Katieb responded that it was an acceptable encroachment for the benefit of the public to identify and have visible for access. Discussion was had on the exact width, and staff and the Commission found that a 55 -foot corridor was acceptable and allowed for a planned break in the wall plane for the hotel. Condition #1 b was discussed and after deliberation the condition was revised. Commissioner Evans queried the two Starwood Real Estate offices and Mr. Madison responded that one was a temporary office and would be abandoned when the office in the Time Share building was CO'd and that there would be no more than two real estate offices operational at the public plaza. Linear square footage of commercial retail and parking were discussed in length. The Commission and staff were presented a scheme that showed exact locations of a SSF and SMV realty office and wished to limit the locations of all offices on the public plaza. Mr. Katieb noted that this was intended to enhance a place -making experience. Condition #1C was discussed, and after deliberation, was deleted since the plaza would be platted and the view corridor was resolved already. Mr. Katieb clarified a staff request for language on Condition#1 D and discussed the solar access study goals of #1 E. Condition #1 F was discussed, and the building heights were tied to the development plan and final approval of the design standards. Staff had no objection to this approach if the heights were finally approved through the design standards and the design review approval process to the satisfaction of the Commission. Staff discussed the goal of the design standards and all were in agreement on this recommendation (#1 G). Condition #2 addressed parking concerns, which included setting an inappropriate precedent of parking spaces; too little parking would create unhappy owners, and the Commission felt the impact of the parking did not impact the town as it would the Confluence site, and office parking should be under the commercial category since the ratio was higher than the Municipal code requirements. Mr. Madison commented that it would be a $3 million cost for additional parking under the water table. Staff discussed the greatest variation by use and after further Commission comment, the parking conditions were deleted. Conversation continued with the "covenant"word issue and its financial impact to East West Resorts. Mr. Katieb relayed it was a concern for the Town's attorney to review and deferred comment. Condition #3 addressed General Conditions and conversation included Water Rights, Master Landscaping Plan, parcels to be deeded to the Town and other items to provide a clean PUD Development Plan. Norm Wood discussed Water Rights with the Commission and revealed that Town Council would address this issue, and both Conditions #3a and #3b were requested for deletion by staff. Mr. Madison questioned the timing of the construction of the cul-de-sacs. The rest of the conditions were reviewed by staff and there were no questions. Commissioner Green requested the addition of conditions to add incentive to allowing more commercial in the future and revising General Note 12 on the PUD Plan. CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING Commissioner Savage moved to approve Resolution No. 06-02 recommending approval of the Subdivision Variances and Preliminary Subdivision Plan for Riverfront Subdivision in conjunction with the Confluence PUD Amendment as more specifically described in the Application dated August 8, 2005, with the following changes and conditions: Required revisions to the Development Plan: A. Delete General Notes 7a, 7b, and 7c, and revise as follows: "A fifty-five (55) foot view corridor through the public plaza adjacent to the proposed hotel as presented on the development plan and the final plat for the Riverfront Subdivision shall remain unobstructed from the ground level upwards, with the exception of the gondola terminal. Minor encroachments such as awnings, landscaping, overhangs, decks and railings shall be reviewed and may be approved through the design review approval process". B. Delete General Note #1 and revise as follows: Professional offices, including real estate offices, shall be limited to the two locations on the public plaza as depicted to the Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2006. A temporary timeshare sales office will be permitted in the hotel and must be vacated within thirty (30) days of issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Building E (Lot 3). No other plaza level spaces are permitted for use by professional and general office, including financial institutions and real estate offices or residential units. C. Add the following general note: 'This PUD Plan contains the development standards and uses for the Riverfront PUD. Other uses and provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code not specifically addressed herein, or in the related development agreement, shall apply to the Riverfront PUD." D. Add the following note: A solar access study showing the effects of shading on adjacent buildings and outdoor spaces is required for all proposed buildings exceeding 3 stories in height. Sun studies should be prepared on a site plan of a scale not less than 1 "=40' showing shadows at 10 am and 3pm on March 21 June 21, September 21, and December 21. E. The maximum building height shall be as follows: i. Hotel, Timeshare and Whole Ownership- as depicted on Land Use Table of PUD Development Plan dated January 12, 2006. ii. In all instances, the maximum allowable percentage of a building ridgeline to be at or near the maximum height shall be governed by the more restrictive criteria of the Riverfront Design Standards and the Town of Avon Design Review Guidelines. F. Final approval of this PUD Development plan is conditioned upon approval of site specific design standards ("Riverfront Design Standards") by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council, incorporated on the PUD Development Plan and recorded at the time of approval of the PUD. The criteria, at a minimum, shall include design elements as outlined in Exhibit A to Resolution 06- 01. 2. Parking Conditions: A. Delete General Note #8 and revise as follows: "A parking management plan, generally consistent with recommendations outlined in the Walker Preliminary Parking Operations Plan dated December 5, 2005 shall be submitted and, after review and approval by the Zoning Administrator, be recorded as a covenant with by issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The approved plan shall not be changed without notification of the Town, and shall be enforceable by the Zoning Administrator". 3. General Conditions: A. Water Rights: The property owner shall convey to the Town the water rights necessary to serve the approved development. Final water right determination shall be resolved between the property owner and the Town prior to the recording of a Final Plat. B. Revise General Note #10 to add the following: Additional Commercial GLFA exceeding the PUD maximum may be approved for restaurant, bars, cocktail lounges and similar uses subject to a Special Review Use. C. Revise General Note #12 to: Office space above but not on the public plaza level may be converted to Residential/Lodging uses provided the maximum number of Dwelling Units is not exceeded after such conversion. Required parking shall be recalculated after taking into account such conversion and any excess parking spaces may then be individually deeded. D. The property owner shall submit a master landscaping and public plaza design plan for Lots 1-7, including Tract A, to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to issuance of the first building permit for the hotel. E. Tract "A" shall be deeded to the Town and zoned "Open Space, Landscaping and Drainage" in accordance with section 17.20.120 of the Municipal Code prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy but no later than January 1, 2008. F. The Affordable Housing requirement shall be determined by Council if amended from the existing 10% requirement. G. The property owner shall construct the proposed Westin Hotel or equivalent, Public Plaza, and gondola as generally submitted in the August 3, 2005 application. Significant changes to the hotel brand or brand equivalent, public plaza, conceptual architectural illustrations or conveyance to the Beaver Creek Landing shall require a major amendment to the PUD. H. A revised development agreement shall incorporate and reference the approved PUD Development Plan, including all conditions of approval specified in Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 06-01. 1. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. Commissioner Struve seconded the motion. All commissioners were in favor and the motion passed 7— 0. XI. Other Business A. Tambi Katieb revealed to the Commission the hiring of a GIS Planning Analyst to the Community Development Department. VIII. Adjourn Commissioner Savage motioned to adjourn. All Commissioners were in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm. Respectfully submitted, Ruth Weiss Recording Secretary APPROVED: Chris Evans Chairman Phil Struve Secretary 5. Commercial and Industrial Development Guidelines The overall design theme for the Town shall be to establish an attractive appearance for visitors and residents "and yet be flexible enough to allow design innovation. The architectural styles should be contemporary, having in common, pitched roofs, stepped facades, recessed windows, balconies, and subtle earthtone colors that have a maximum Light Reflective Value (LRV) not to exceed 60 (LRV). There are a few existing buildings that have vibrant blue or red roofs, or long blank, windowless walls. These building designs are no longer acceptable. A contemporary commercial building in downtown Avon. A. Commercial and Industrial Site Development Site desi¢n Buildings and other improvements should be individually designed for the site on which they are to be placed. The site and its relationship to other structures, scenic values, views, and climatic orientation should be the dominant factors in the design and sighting of buildings. Pedestrian access ways should be aligned and focused on architectural or aesthetic features. The main components of commercial site design that should be considered throughout the design development process include: • Building, walls, roofs, ridgelines, eaves, and other architectural features • Service, loading, refuse collection areas and storage areas Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 26 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 SAME AS ORIGINAL • Special user amenities (i.e. pedestrian plazas, enhanced pedestrian zones) and other special features (i.e. focal architectural elements, landscape features and public art) • Outdoor dining areas (when food service is a component of a single or multiple tenant center) • Linkage and coordination elements with surrounding uses Minimum requirements: 1. Site layout and proposed improvements shall consider the use of passive and active solar access, and consideration of neighboring properties views and solar access. Proposal should follow the local development pattern (i.e. geometry of street system, open space and view corridors, common setbacks, streetscapes). The continuation of such patterns should contribute to a unified visual appearance within the area. 2. The location of structures and access shall complement the existing topography of the site. Excessive grading and/or the use of engineer -designed retaining walls are discouraged when an alternate site layout would minimize such disturbances. 3. Buildings and improvements shall be designed and sited to conform to the natural terrain and to take advantage of views. Terraced buildings and parking will minimize site disturbance, and disturbed areas should be revegetated with recommended plant species listed in Appendix 1. The use of listed noxious weeds, as provided in Appendix 2, is prohibited. 4. The use of sun exposure -reducing elements such as overhangs, pergolas, canopies, eaves and awnings should be designed as integral components of the architectural design. Passive solar design is encouraged. However within these spaces, there should be a variety of sun and shade conditions to allow full use during the extreme heat of summer months and take advantage of warm winter days. North facing entries and outdoor space such as courtyards and plazas should be carefully considered because of winter conditions. 5. Building entries and public spaces should be treated with special design emphasis, easily identifiable, and visible from the public realm. So/nr Exposure iiarw? Views 'rerroced b-44"If Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 27 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 Site Access Access to the building site requires consideration of topography and building orientation. Avoidance of steep slopes, the blending of access with the natural contours of a site, and sensitivity to solar orientation, are important in establishing a successful access. Where access drives connect to public streets, drainage and landscape maintenance are the responsibility of the owner. Additionally, heated driveways must not exceed the property line. Minimum requirements: 1. Adequate distance from intersections and proper relation to other entrances. 2. Satisfactory width, grades, radii etc. as indicated in Table 1.0. 3. Turn lanes, if required by the Town Engineer, shall be designed in accordance with requirements indicated in Table 1.0. 4. Residential projects with 6 or fewer units shall be restricted to a single point of vehicle access from the public right-of-way. Additional points of access must be specifically approved by the Planning & Zoning Commission, with the finding that additional access points are required for the project to otherwise conform to these Design Standards and other applicable Town regulations. 5. The grade of the first 20 feet of driveway adjacent and perpendicular to the paved public way shall not exceed 4% grade. 6. Parking lot grades should not exceed 6% and driveway grades should not exceed 8% for multi -family residential, mixed-use, and commercial projects or 10% for small residential projects. 7. The grade of the first 20 feet of driveway adjacent to the garage or outside parking space shall not exceed 4% grade. 8. Project site plans shall include provisions for emergency vehicle access when required. 9. Adequate maneuvering for all vehicles on site must be provided. 10. Where buildings are required to be setback far from the street, a strong pedestrian connection shall be provided to the street edge to promote connectivity to transit and existing and planned pedestrian pathways and network stops. Parkins and Loading Surface parking is discouraged in the pedestrian oriented commercial areas of the Town, except for short-term use and service functions. The predominant parking functions should occur in structured parking areas for large commercial projects. Minimum requirements: 1. Required spaces provided must be in compliance with standards set forth in Section 17.24.020 of the Town of Avon Zoning Code. 2. All spaces must be accessible and meet minimum size requirements as required in Section 17.24.020 of the Town of Avon Zoning Code. 3. All parking must be off-street. Ninety -degree stalls are encouraged. Complete vehicular circulation including back-up and tum -around areas must be provided. 4. Parking areas must be concrete or asphalt with spaces clearly marked. Two handicapped stalls per each 100 stalls are recommended. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 28 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 5. Driveway or maneuvering areas within a parking lot must be designed to provide for safe and reasonable maneuverability of vehicles. 6. Parking areas shall include landscaping and screen surface parking. Parkinj Arca ln4erive Landscaping '�ir,..�. • ,nom LanbcaM Parkirylof fcrsninf Easements Disturbance in drainage and utility easements should be avoided. Landscaping placed in easements may be subject to removal and are the responsibility of the property owner to replace and maintain. Trees placed in drainage easements paralleling public streets may be damaged or destroyed by Town maintenance operations. Dedicated easements shall remain unobstructed unless they are officially vacated. Site Gradine Grading a property should be minimized, and only done as necessary for building improvement. Grading required in easements and setbacks is expected to be restored and revegetated to natural conditions before site construction is complete. Where finished grades require retaining wall placement, a series of lower retaining walls with landscaped terraces is preferable to a high wall with an unbroken vertical face. Minimum requirements: 1. Site improvements should be designed to conform to existing site topography to minimize required grading and effect on adjacent properties. All grading shall occur within the property boundaries. Both existing and finished grades are required to be clearly marked on the site plan submittal, to the extent specified on the Minimum Submittal Requirements (Appendix 3) checklist. 2. Maximum slope of disturbed slopes shall not exceed 2 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical without special documentation and review. 3. Horizontal and vertical variations in grading cut and fill areas should resemble a natural configuration. Long slopes should be varied to avoid the appearance of flat surfaces, unless the original slope was in this configuration prior to grading. 4. Building sighting and foundation excavation shall avoid the disruption of existing natural features such as mature trees whenever possible. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 29 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 5. All grading, including utility connections, is required to be shown within the proposed 'site disturbance boundary' on submitted application plan sets. 6. All grading shall require erosion control methods so that dirt and fill material does not leave the property on to the public right of way and adjacent properties._ A surety may be required for the proper installation and maintenance of erosion control. 7. All graded areas shall be revegetated as soon as practicable during the construction process. Dust suppression and the prevention of noxious weed infestation is the responsibility of the owner/developer. 8. Retaining walls shall be constructed of permanent type materials such as concrete, gabions, reinforced earth, etc. railroad ties are not acceptable. Retaining wall design details may be required for design review. 9. Walls over 4 feet high shall be structurally designed or certified by a licensed engineer (P.E.). Drainage Adequate grading plans ensure that drainage is functional on a building site. The builder is responsible for preventing erosion of the site both during construction and after the project is complete. Grading plans must adequately demonstrate positive drainage away from building structures. Minimum requirements: 1. All drainage easements shall remain unobstructed. Drainage into common open space is not allowed except in existing natural drainage channels or drainage easements. Drainage swales should not surface drain across major walkways or trail systems. Parking bays and walkways should not slope toward the building without adequate provisions for draining storm water away from the structure. All paved areas must be sloped to drain. 2. All structures shall be located above or be protected from the 100 -year floodplain, where identified by FEMA mapping. Where mapping is unavailable, the Town may require a qualified engineer to conduct an analysis of whether or not the proposed structures are proposed in a floodway or floodplain. 3. Minimum setback of thirty feet shall be maintained from mean annual high water mark of all continuously flowing streams. 4. All development shall conform to the Town of Avon Drainage Design Manual, as part of the Master Drainage Study (Sept. 1994). (Appendix 5). 5. All construction projects shall conform to the Town of Avon Pollution Control Plan Manual. (Appendix 4). Snow Removal and Storage The Town of Avon receives varying amounts of precipitation depending on aspect and elevation, typically in the form of snow. However, all sites must be able to adequately accommodate and transport snow on site in conjunction with approved drainage easements. Minimum requirements: 1. An area equal to 20% of the total impermeable surfaced area of the site, upon which aboveground construction does not occur, shall be designated and developed as a snow storage area. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 30 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 2. Designated snow storage areas shall be located and developed to be compatible with snow removal operations, not less than six (6') feet wide, and shall be adjacent to the impermeable area from which the snow is to be removed. 3. Runoff from snow storage areas shall be directed through a treatment facility as required for treatment of runoff from parking and driveway areas. 4. On-site snow storage requirements may be waived by the Planning and Zoning Commission upon the demonstration that an appropriate alternative snow -storage site is available and that arrangements have been made for the continuation of snow removal and off-site storage. 5. Excavation, retaining walls, or other structures within slope maintenance and snow storage easements adjacent to public rights-of-way shall be confined to those strictly required for effective site access. Water and Sewer, Trash Storaee Each site design shall address the availability and design of water and sewer service, along with trash storage on the lot. Trash storage must be identified on the site plan, including design detail, for all multi -family units greater than a duplex. Minimum requirements: 1. Each structure designed for human occupancy shall be connected with water and sewer facilities made available by existing water and sewer districts. Letters of commitment from the appropriate districts may be required. 2. No private wells or sewer systems shall be used within the Town except as provided in the Subdivision Regulations. 3. Each project shall have receptacles for the temporary storage and collection of refuse in accordance with regulations and standards regarding the protection of wildlife. The handling of trash for all projects larger than a single-family unit (i.e. duplex, triplex) shall be noted on the site plan. When necessary, bear resistant trash receptacles may be required. 4. All trash receptacles shall be screened from public view and protected from disturbance. 5. Refuse storage area shall be accessible by collection vehicles and should be incorporated into building design whenever possible. Non-combustible receptacles only for ash. SAME AS ORIGINAL A well -screened and attractive service and trash enclosure at the Brookside Lodge. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 31 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 Sidewalks As necessary in certain commercial subdivisions and planned unit developments, the inclusion of sidewalks on a property shall be required by the Town to provide a neighborhood amenity. Minimum requirements: 1. Sidewalks or walkways shall be provided as necessary for efficient pedestrian circulation within the project and with neighboring properties. Walkways should be separated from vehicular traffic where possible. 2. Walkways should be constructed of attractive, durable materials such as decorative concrete or brick pavers. 3. Walkway widths should be compatible with anticipated uses, but in no instance, shall be less than 4' wide as a minimum standard. B. Commercial and Industrial Building Design General Commercial Design Character In addition to the stated Design Philosophy, and General Design Compatibility, buildings should be designed to maximize energy efficiency by limiting windows and doors on the north, and taking advantage of sun exposure on the south. Additionally, building design and location should generally minimize impacts on solar and view corridors of neighboring properties Building facades should be stepped to avoid long straight walls, and entrances should be recessed. All sides of buildings should receive equal architectural treatment. Windows should be placed to provide architectural interest. Large, uninterrupted glass areas should be avoided. Emphasis of building design shall be prioritized with primary emphasis being placed on the first two floors, or the "base area". At the pedestrian scale, buildings should contain quality design details that are harmonious with the overall building architecture. Secondary emphasis shall be placed on the top floor or "roof form" with particular attention placed on roof style, treatment, and screening. Rooftop equipment and vents should be concealed with a treatment that is complementary to the building architecture. It is preferred that buildings be designed as a composition of architectural elements rather than larger single `blocks' that appear unrelated in form and context. Buildin¢ Massing: The intent of this section is to avoid the appearance of large blocks by encouraging the creation of appropriately scaled buildings through the use of segmented forms and massing. Building massing should serve to define entry points to buildings and help orient users. The scale and proportion of the spaces between building masses should also be given careful consideration, especially in shopping and pedestrian areas. These "public spaces" should be designed with attention given to their height, width, and length to maximize the comfort to users. These "public spaces" should include detailing that adds interest, orientation and spatial definition. Minimum requirements: 1. The building shall be designed as a composition of architectural elements rather than larger single blocks that appear unrelated in form and context. 2. The street level architecture shall enhance pedestrian activity and encourage a lively center of retail activity in the commercial core area, where appropriate. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 32 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 3. Building facades shall be articulated .with variations in material and punctuated with intermediate roof forms and building projections. 4. Varying expressions of decks, windows and surface treatment shall be combined to create a rich texture that will enhance the interest of the facades. 5. The three primary building components comprising the building's base, body and top shall be clearly and deliberately expressed. The building's base shall express mass and support. Buildine Height The height of structures, unless otherwise specified in a planned unit development, shall conform to the zone district limitations stated in Title 17: Zoning Regulations. The definition of height is set forth in the `Definitions' section of these guidelines. No exceptions to the height requirements shall be made, except as specifically approved for penetrations of certain architectural projections such as flues, chimneys, cupolas, towers or other elements that add architectural character and variety to the skyline. Solar access is of primary importance within the town core, and commercial designs may be required to provide solar access studies showing the effect of shading on adjacent buildings and outdoor,spaces (Sun studies should be prepared on a site plan of a scale not less than 1"=40' showing shadows at 10 am and 3pm on March 21, June 21, September 21, and December 21). A solar study shall be required for buildings exceeding 3 stories located in the Town Core. Building Height will be determined by utilizing the site development plan and elevations. All ridge elevations, and numeric existing and proposed grades must be labeled on the site plan to accurately determine height. Additionally, the elevation plans must show existing and proposed grades (also labeled in numeric form). Buildine Materials and Colors The intent of these guidelines is to provide architectural control to ensure that the architectural design of structures and their materials and colors are visually harmonious with the town's overall appearance, with surrounding development, with natural and existing landforms, and with officially approved development plans. These guidelines should represent the minimum standard to achieve this goal, without being so cumbersome as to not allow varied high-quality design that meets this intent. Minimum requirements: 1. The use of high quality, durable, low maintenance building materials is highly encouraged. 2. The following materials and wall finishes will not ordinarily be permitted on the exterior of any structure: asphalt siding, imitation brick, imitation log siding or plastic. Metal siding, cementitious siding or concrete block will be permitted only with specific approval of the Commission. Each elevation must use a minimum of two materials (i.e. stucco, siding, wood). 3. All exposed exterior walls and roofs of buildings, retaining walls, and accessory structures shall be earth tone in color and shall blend in with the natural setting. Colors shall not exceed a light -reflective value (LRV) of 60 percent. 4. All flues, flashing and other reflective materials shall be painted to match and/or appropriately contrast with adjacent materials. In some cases, physical screening may be required. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 33 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 5. Electric and other utility meters shall be attached to the main structure and screened to minimize contrast with adjacent materials. Roofs Roof forms are strong determinants of architectural style. Due to climatic conditions, roof forms should be kept simple, with pitches limited to 6:12 to 12:12 for sloped roofs. Flat roofs are discouraged except for limited roof areas for the location of concealed mechanical equipment, or for architectural effect. Secondary shed -type roofs should have pitches no less than 4:12. Valleys and complex roof forms are a potential source of ice buildup and water damage, and should be used carefully and sparingly. Minimum requirements: 1. The use of dormers (shed, peaked, eyebrow, etc.) is encouraged to help break up large expanses of roof, to enhance the usability of attic spaces, and to add interest to the roof- scape. 2. Roofing materials should be durable, weather resistant and suitable for environmental conditions encountered in this area. Colors should be natural or earth tones. Large expanses of bright, reflective materials will not be acceptable. Asphalt and fiberglass composition shingles must be of high quality and minimum weight of 300 pounds per square. Untreated shakes are not permitted. 3. In the Town Core, unglazed concrete, copper, standing seam metal, or terne-coated steel are acceptable materials (Shake shingles, asphalt, and fiberglass roofs are generally discouraged). Tile and metal roofs shall be a dull finish and be muted to fit within the context and meet overall building design. 4. All roofs, except the flat portion thereof, shall have a rise of not less than 4 -inches in 12 - inches of distance. 5. Pitched roofs shall be oriented such that excessive snow and ice does not accumulate over, or drop onto pedestrian walkways, parking areas or drives. Special protection may be required for roofs so oriented. Overhangs are required on pitched roofs, and shall extend at least one and one-half feet from the point where the wall meets the roof. The minimum overhang length is 18 inches for structures 3 stories or less. For structures exceeding 3 stories, the minimum overhang length shall be 36 inches for primary roofs. Secondary dormers and roof elements should be proportional to scale and style. In all buildings, regardless of the height or number of stories, exterior details shall be appropriately scaled. 6. Exposed metal flashing, gutters, downspouts or other building appurtenances must be copper, steel, iron, or aluminum, applied and fastened in a high-quality manner. When painted, these elements must be finished with a baked enamel paint, epoxy paint, or a silicon -modified alloy. 7. Snow shedding is a major concern that must be carefully considered in the designing roofs. Building entries, garage and service doors, shop fronts, and other points of entry must be located out of the path of shedding snow. Gable fronts, covered porches, balconies, and snow retention devices are all acceptable methods of dealing with snow shedding off of sloped roofs. Landscape features such as retaining walls or raised planters may also be used to direct pedestrians out of the way of snow or ice shed areas. Where removal of snow from roofs is anticipated, mechanical and safety devices should be provided, as well as easy access to the roof. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 34 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 8. Roofs shall be varied and articulated. 9. Roofs shall be proportional to the height and scale of the various building elevations. The primary roof(s) and upper portion of the walls shall be articulated so as to minimize their visual impact on surrounding properties which may include such measures as the introduction of decks and the lowering of rooflines. Interesting roof forms add character, such as those found in the Westgate PUD. Exterior Walls The form of exterior walls in the commercial areas of the Town should grow out of a balanced response between the public spaces they front and the interior functions they enclose. Walls can be broken down in scale through the use of windows, doorways, recesses and setbacks. They should be further articulated through the use of different materials, patterns, ornament, texture, and color. Walls should also respond to solar exposure in their placement. Exterior walls should attempt to enclose exterior space and to create a sense of 'street'. This encourages the linkage of one building to the rest, and the continuation of urban form as opposed to individual buildings in the landscape. Minimum requirements: 1. Stucco and synthetic stucco are suitable on upper walls of buildings. Joints, variety or color, and changes in plan should create a sense of scale on stucco walls. 2. Stone elements should be used when appropriate on the base of larger buildings, up the walls, or in elements such as chimneys or towers. Roughly squared stone set in a random pattern is preferable to more formal uses of stone. In large walls, stone should be set with larger stones at the bottom gradually diminishing to smaller stones at the top. 3. Projections such as deep eaves, overhangs, canopies, and other features that provide architectural interest are encouraged. Fenestration should be articulated on large exterior walls to break up massing. At a minimum, no single wall plane should exceed 70% of the elevation of any exposure. Breaks in the wall plane should form at least a 2 -foot step/setback. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 35 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 SAME AS ORIGINAL 4. Wood siding should be avoided in commercial building where it will be in contact with snow (at the base). The scale of wood siding (4", 6", 8", or larger) should be appropriate and complement the desired design of an exterior wall space. 5. Exterior elements such as porches, roof overhangs, dormers, and gables should utilize heavy timber when appropriate to create interest, give scale, and signify areas of architectural importance. 6. Building facades will be stepped to avoid long straight walls. All sides of the building must receive equal architectural treatment. Desim of Pedestrian Frontaees Building frontages and sides of buildings oriented to the street or other public areas (i.e. parks, open space, trails, or corridors) should incorporate a combination of arcades, pedestrian level displays windows, storefronts, and store entrances. To activate the building frontage, entrances should be located at intervals at a maximum of 50 feet. Building frontages should exhibit human scale detail, windows and other openings along ground floor pedestrian areas. Windows Windows establish patterns, rhythms, and scale on the exterior walls. They respond to uses and needs on the interior and are recognizable indications of what goes on behind them. Variety in the use of windows is encouraged within certain limits. Commercial spaces must have large areas of glass opening onto public pathways, streets, or sidewalks (suggested goal is 75% glass). Hotels and other private uses should have more limited use of glass. In all cases, large uninterrupted areas of glass are discouraged. Division of windows by mullions and muntins adds character and gives scale to the building. Minimum requirements: 1. Aluminum, steel, painted wood, or clad wood windows are permitted in all commercial areas. Mirrored glass, snap -in muntins, glass curtain walls, and other assemblies which are clearly out of character with the Town Core are prohibited. 2. Pedestrian level windows in commercial spaces require a minimum allowable glass area of 75% of walls opening on to the ground/pedestrian level. The maximum size of individual panes of glass is not to exceed 16 square feet without special review. In general, areas of glass unbroken by wall or structure should not exceed 150 square feet. 3. Pedestrian level windows in hotel or office spaces should be as open as possible and not less than 50% glass, unless it is a north exposure, in which case glass may be reduced to 40%. The same restrictions apply to sizes of individual panes and areas of glass unbroken by wall or structure. 4. All upper levels of commercial, hotel, and/or office area have no requirements for percentage of window to wall, but are restricted to individual panes of a maximum of 10 square feet and a maximum overall glass area of 48 square feet per window opening. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 36 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 o�r,,,.,9 in wall Windaw5 /6 SF MaX rn Doors and Entryways Public doors and entryways within the Town should be a combination of glass and metal or wood, or solid wood. All -glass or all -metal doors are discouraged. Doors should be used to establish interest, character, and variety along the public right-of-way. Where possible, gates, courtyards, staircases, and bridges should he used to connect buildings and create outdoor moms and linkages. Service doors may be hollow metal or solid wood in hollow metal frames. Main entries should not be placed on the north side of buildings unless no other alternative exists. When a main entry occurs on a north fagade it should be covered with a porch or porte cochere. G? sways Decks and Balconies and Exterior Walkways Decks and Balconies become part of the design palette used to enrich the character and create variety on the building exteriors. Where possible, balconies and decks should be located to take advantage of solar exposure, and should be used in combination with bay windows and other exterior projections. Long, linear balconies such as might appear on a common motel are discouraged in the Town. Care should also be taken in locating walkways to avoid placing them in areas which are in shadow all winter long. On the north side of buildings, sidewalks should either be covered or far enough away from the building to be out of its shadow for several hours each day. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 31 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 SAME AS ORIGINAL This Outdoor Liehtine Lighting systems will serve functional and aesthetic roles in commercial areas. These roles are: to provide security and visual safety, to serve as directional indicators for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic; to provide extended outdoor use time, particularly in pedestrian gathering areas; and to reinforce the identity and character of a project through form, color and materials of fixtures, visual light quality, and placement. Access to a clear and visible night sky is a strong value to our community. Night lighting on a site must be regulated to minimize the undesirable effects that 'over -lighting' a site can have on a community, neighbors, and guests. At the same time, lighting is desirable for safety and aesthetic purposes. In all instances, outdoor lighting must comply with Chapter 15.30 of the Municipal Code. Minimum requirements: 1. Lighting should be provided for all parking, drive, and walkway areas and may be required as a condition of design approval. hi all commercial, retail and office parcels, lighting must be designed and arranged so as not to reflect excessive light upon abutting or adjacent properties. 2. Lighting should be considered as a design feature as well as providing illumination. Area lighting shall generally be a metal halide, cut-off type fixtures with a maximum mounting height of 15 feet for walkways and 25 feet for parking areas. There shall be no exposed light source on a property, and all fixtures must utilize frosted or seeded glass. 3. Pedestrian areas should utilize low-level light sources to accent or illuminate the ground plane. These design elements should provide light for safety and aesthetic effect. By day, the physical shapes and sizes lend animation and scale to pedestrian spaces. 4. Lights that flash, move, revolve, rotate, flicker, blink, or vary in both intensity and color to emit intermittent pulsation shall be expressly prohibited as fixed light sources. This does not include holiday/seasonal lighting, which is temporary in nature for the holiday/season, from November 15`s to March I". C. Commercial and Industrial Landscaoin Design Character Landscaping in Commercial and Industrial areas of the Town must recognize the drought conditions that prevail in our western region, and be tolerant of these drought episodes. Plant material selection and placement must ensure safe sight lines to traffic and signs. Care should be taken that no hazards are created for pedestrians and vehicles by plant litter. Trees and shrubs with thorns should not be used in or near pedestrian areas. All landscape development for commercial Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 36 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 projects, including specific landscaping elements such as planters, retaining walls and berms must be specifically approved. Landscaping should accentuate a project design, not hide it from public view. Landscaping must meet minimum zoning requirements; however, only 20% of the total landscaped area may be irrigated. Irrigated areas must be delineated on all plans. Minimum requirements: 1. Landscaping must be designed to incorporate water conserving materials and techniques through the application of seven fundamental xeriscape landscaping principles including: a. Planning and designing a landscaped area that groups plants with similar water and sunlight requirements together. b. Creating practical and appropriate turf areas (when necessary), utilizing a lower water - use turf such as buffalograss, blue grama, or turf type tall fescues and fine fescues. c. Use of low water demanding plants and dryland seed grass mixes. d. Use of automatic irrigation systems, designed and operated to conserve water by applying the right amount of water at the right time. e. Incorporation of soil amendments, where appropriate for the site and type of plants proposed. f. Use of Mulches, such as woodchips, to reduce evaporation potential and keep the soil cool. g. Planting appropriate materials suited to the soil and climate, and appropriately maintaining the vegetation once established. 2. Preserve and protect as much existing vegetation as possible. Incorporate existing trees when locating structures. 3. Consideration should be given to use of landscape material for snow fencing, visual screening and wind breaks when applicable. Hedges, in winter, become snow fences and must be placed accordingly. 4. Plant materials should be adaptable to the area and selection and placement should include consideration of function and color coordination. Proposed materials must be called out on plans. A list of recommended plant species that are compatible with various climate zones found in the Town is attached in Appendix 1. No noxious weeds, as listed in Appendix 2, shall be permitted for use in the Town. Irrigation/Watering Requirements: 1. The landscaping site plan must identify the area of approximate installation of an automatic irrigation system, its maintenance, and intended uses. All landscape plans must note and delineate all irrigated and sod areas. 2. A rain sensor must be installed with each new irrigation system, in order to interrupt irrigation in the event of a significant rainfall. Inspection for the rain sensor will be conducted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 3. The following table must be provided on all landscape plans: Landscape Area Provided % of Lot / Square Footage Total Irrigated Area % of Landscaped Area / Square Footage Spray Area % of Irrigated Area / Square Footage Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 39 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 Drip Area % of Irrigated Area / Square Footage Sod Area % of Irrigated Area / Square Footage 4. All irrigation shall be subject to the watering schedule as imposed by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District (ERWSD). 5. Temporary (overhead) sprinkler irrigation is allowed to re-establish native vegetation and seed mixes on otherwise non -irrigated portions of the landscaped areas, however, must be removed 1 year after installation. All disturbed areas will be adequately reseeded and restored on all projects. Turf Requirements: 1. The following types of ornamental grasses are recommended: Buffalo grass, Blue Grams, Little Bluestem, Smooth Brome, Crested Wheatgrass or Western Wheatgrass. 2. In all disturbed areas, soil must be prepared with the addition of organic matter, and tilling the soil as deep as possible. The addition of decomposed organic matter (compost, composed horse manure, or composted chopped straw or hay) is required for turf installation. Well placed landscaping on a commercial projects accentuates the project features. Fencine and Screenine All commercial service areas are to be screened from adjacent land uses by architectural features such as solid four -foot or six-foot fences, and/or heavily massed plant materials. All fences, whether decorative or for screening must be constructed of wood; masonry walls will only be considered if they are designed as an integral component of the building's architecture. Buffering may be required by architectural features if excessive noise levels are anticipated or encountered. Minimum requirements: 1. Loading and unloading facilities must be separated from employee, customer and visitor circulation and parking areas wherever feasible. All service areas, loading and unloading docks must be screened from public view. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 40 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 SAI'r<flE As OR P GINAL l 2. Ground -mounted equipment such as power transformers and air handling equipment must be screened from public view by either materials integral with the building, a fence or landscaping, all of which must be specifically approved for the site. Trash dumpsters shall be screened by a six-foot fence or wall similar in character to the adjacent structure, with access gates as necessary. 3. Fence materials shall be compatible with the site and the materials of the structures on the site. Fencing may be used in combination with plant materials. In all cases, however, plant materials must be used to screen utility boxes. Meters, phone pedestals, and transformers will occur to the side and rear of the building whenever possible and be appropriately screened. 4. No wall, fence, or planter in excess of two -feet in height should be constructed or maintained nearer to the front lot line than the front building setback line. No front, side or rear fence, wall or hedge may be more than six -feet in height. 5. Fences should be either one of three types in commercial areas: two (split) rail open fences, four -foot solid fence, or a six-foot solid fence. No chain-link permitted. Iupwuiiil Erosion Control Erosion control is essential at all building sites. Design plans must indicate the type, method, and placement of erosion control structures on the property. A surety may be required to ensure proper installation and maintenance of these items. All commercial projects will need to reference the Avon Master Drainage Study, available in the Community Development Department for minimum requirements. Retaining Walls The limited use of retaining walls is encouraged. Whenever possible, retaining walls should be utilized only in those areas of a site where finished grades cannot meet recommended standards. Small retaining walls using natural stone boulders are encouraged for use and design with site landscaping. Minimum requirements: 1. Retaining walls shall be constructed of permanent type materials such as concrete, gabions, reinforced earth, etc. railroad ties are not acceptable. Retaining wall design details may be required for design review. 2. Walls over 4 feet high shall be structurally designed or certified by a licensed engineer (P.E.). A series of lower retaining walls with landscaped terraces is preferable to a high wall with an unbroken vertical face. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 41 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 D. Commercial and Industrial Miscellaneous Items Accessory Structures Minimum requirements: 1. Temporary structures including construction storage and office trailers, and tents shall not be allowed except as may be determined to be necessary during construction. 2. Permits for allowed temporary structures may be issued by the Community Development Department as a minor modification/minor project without review by the Commission. Permits shall run concurrent with building permit. 3. Any accessory structures on the building site shall be compatible with the design and materials utilized for the main building structure. Permits for accessory structures may be issued by the Community Development Department as a minor modification/minor project without review by the Commission. 4. Accessory structures must be shown on the final design site plan, and should generally be attached to the main building. The method of attachment should be generally compatible with the overall architectural design. Signs Well-designed and constructed signs attract attention, create a sense of quality and contribute to the overall urban character of the Town. In general, all signs must conform to the Town of Avon sign code unless otherwise conforming to another approved Master Sign Program. All building mounted signs should be located on a fascia or architectural detail designed for such purposes. Freestanding identification signs should reflect the architectural character of the building. Flush mounted signs are encouraged with projecting signs allowed to any adjacent walkway or pedestrian mall. Minimum requirements: 1. No signs, billboards, or other advertising of any kind shall be erected constructed, or maintained on any lot or structure unless approved in accordance with the provisions contained in the Sign Code of the Town of Avon (Section 15.28.00). Communications & Satellite Dish Antennae Satellite dishes are permitted in commercial areas, however, with restrictions on screening these dishes from neighboring properties and prominent views. Screening may be accomplished through the placement on a building, however, a separately built fence/screen may not be used. Minimum requirements: 1. All antennas shall be located so as to be screened from view from any public right-of-way or neighboring property. Screening may be accomplished by, or through the use of landscaping materials, existing structures, sub -grade placements or other means that both screen the antennas and appear natural to the site. 2. All wiring and cable related to antennas installation shall be installed underground or be incorporated entirely within the structure. 3. Color selection for dish antennas should blend with the site and structure. Unpainted surfaces and dish antennas with reflective surfaces shall not be allowed, and surfaces are required to be painted to match adjacent trim surfaces. No advertising, logos or identification shall be allowed on any dish antenna. Town of Avon Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Review Guidelines Page 42 Adopted November 6, 2001 / Revised May 24, 2005 26, 2006 Mark Donaldson VMDA Architects, Inc. P.O. Box 5300 Avon, CO 81620 CPost Office Box 975 400 Benchmark Road Avon, Colorado 81620 970.748-4000 970-949.9139 Fax 970-845.7708 TTY RE: Variance Application for Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision Dear Mark: After reviewing your request for a variance to the parking standards for self -storage, Staff believes there is a more effective way to address the issue that would improve the Avon Municipal Code and better serve to address the point of your application. Simply put, there is no specific section of the Municipal Code which you are seeking relief from (i.e. self -storage is not included on the off-street parking table). Though the Zoning Administrator has the ability to make a determination on uses, the Code does not explicitly state that about zoning standards - parking included. Furthermore, the variance hardship guidelines are the most onerous standards for an applicant to meet, and Staff would not support nor do we believe the Commission could find your application meets this test. It appears that based on your response in the submitted application, the hardship is self-imposed and therefore does not meet the guidelines necessary to recommend approval even if the argument for a separate standard is a rationale one that can be evidenced. As an alternative, Staff will request that the Planning and Zoning Commission initiate a Zoning Code Text Amendment to clarify not only the self -storage use by right in the IC zone, but also establish the corresponding parking standards. We may at the same time seek to clarify the overall parking standards for the same zone district since we have already demonstrated that the uses are too broad for one standard as provided. Mark, I realize that this may cause an unanticipated delay in the application submitted, however my staff is confident that the process for establishing a new standard and text amendment is more productive for all involved than the variance application proposed. As always, I welcome your input and feedback and would like to meet with you to discuss the process and timelines and how we can continue review and feedback in a mutually productive manner. Kind Regards, Tam i atieb, AICP Community Development Director cc: File / Town Manager F:\Cor pondence\Extemal\Planning\Tract Y MIST Variance2006.dm •'. r SELF S'TOM. Gf f• r, a a`,.. rt is S.TANDA RDS a ,y THE, � , ti a..r > ,alts Y ��'�.'� .3 rpt. alia'4 �? �a •5 ��4. vSyJ, ,c^, r,/. T.....�..: ... a .. c • o: . _ .. _ .? yt �.t .. r_t t -s � w3:, Wt� ..iai.._1.b... +t _ _ t.0 �. _riS' -a �;- j.�a: a.�i. ti�C`-.J'1'n Y�y'�i{Yy:'f�4t�vs'a•rS•v `.%: • r r � -� : rQ t •�'y r � � J Rte'-�..,j�' ! "Ca V ♦ ;�• 1I�� j�� 11.. .. ilC nJ. n' ..I- A.A.• LT `}Y , —w , < , t a �l L APPENDIX 3: TRAFFIC GENERATION ANP4YSIS TRAFFIC GENERATED BY SELF STORAGE FACILITIES Prrpnrrd l;rl: Ecoitunur 0m.,u ri p l Assaotf rrs _01 L. Sunthn n Annus. Sir 206 731npr. Az 352SZ-.5140 OVERVIEW Economic Consultim; Associates. Int. conducted n stuldL to deterniuc hon' much lMftic i1 acnerated b.• self storage. 'file stud% was perforated uudcr the sponsorship of tike Self Storacc• Ass1x: i a r is it. Oltcstionnaires elute prep;trcd and rlmdv rvadalde to oremburs. An indepcndenfannlvsis of the rrsults teas performed. Respondents ran=ed from veer small to ver% hhr=c facilities thruuphow the United States, Details ol'our srudy report follow. PURPOSE The aim of thi. study is ah accuratclp incom re :rad determine how Inch uaffic is dener:ncd b% aelk storm_c lacilities.'To this cord, the Sett Storage .lssoc•iation [SSA) contracted with Economic Cansultine: l'entpr. A%. a Firm with experience in this fluid, to conduct an indcpcudcnt,tudy. APPROACH The SS 1% pmparcd a standard qucstionnairy dual self storage operators Could use to record traffic data. Tim form eros delivered to all numbers of the SSA and teas also publicized on the Internet, in meetings reit[ operators Anil ilu'uueh other distribution channels (sec form in Appendix R. Pale Completed yucstionnaires were returned to the as,oclattun and were provided to its tier analysis. EG\ inspected the quexlinnn:Fires. obtaiucd additional iniormatiou b.' callin= resiwndenrs when data:.vcre incomplete or required ciarifiraiiun, checked the addition oil the torn., assembled and :uul%zed the data and provided this report of tlhc rt,ith,. Certain questionnaires were not used in the >tudc for a variety of reasons. which included illc"ibiiit rhe -v wcre incomplete or the ica1rondunt's tacilm. was not a typical self storage business. The latter included a cambivauon self uorage and office n'atrhonsc :uul another trhich was primarily an RV 'enrage. for esmnplc. Since only nnr questionnaire era, re:ciccd for Canada, it was also excluded. Only facilitic, that had seven day a meek access were included in the analysis. since uvarl-v all of the respondent, wen• open for husiucs, Sundav lhroulgh Sauirdac.'10 iltCludc others that did not operate seven dans a .%e•ck mold have licca incunsiSiClIt. ill our npiuion. Pinallt, dura teas based on emnputcrired =arc enrrics during the months of AjVTIl through June of 200 1. RESPONDENT PROFILE '1'ltis atudt eontaiued 158 usable response... While this is a sm:111 tracliu n.ol tilt• 35,11110 ph:, f.i iimcs in the U.S.. it is the second largest :e,pnusc oI an. publicly ayailahlc study on this ,tibjcc;. ECA condo Cted a prior self sturai;c uaffic anal.sis on hchalf of the ]Iini-St"Inee %lusscnear :nneazinr in Frbnlsr% 19911 ["Dispelling the Self-Swr1 c Tragic klvth" that w•as based on data front icer 250 tacilitics. The SSA studs is hclicyrd to bC more reprvwntative of the intlu.tn'. bectu,c this current data is hascd on etc average sized facility of 1$!)00 square feet from over 90 cities in the l!nitcd State,. The response in the earlier study was based an information from tocilitics smaller than rhe .image project. 'rhe mode of respondent racilitie, in this iurrviii Stud.• contained 500 rt, 599 spaces and nearly nnr third (31 65'b ) hall 600 of mol 'c'pact S. for example (see Table I). Q TABLE 1 RESPONDENTS BY NUMBER OF SPACES SPACES NUMBER 4t` OF TOTAL 100.199 4 2.53 200-_'99 r 4.43 311(1--:199 22 13.92 400.•395) 34 21.512. 5011.599 41 25.95 000699 2:3 14.56 700-799 12 7.59 800-899 4 3.53 900-999 4 2.5:3 1010.11399^_ 4 I.1.17 1.100.1.199 2 1.27 1200-I?99 2 127 1.300.1.:399 0 0 1.4000-1:190 0 0 1'500-1.5191 0 0 1.35310-1.11199 11 0 1.700-1.799 l 0.11:3 Total 158 IOO.II •';. shows that the mocle teas hcn%een 50.000 anti 59.999 rentable sq. ft. 'rile ,rvarest concentration of m,pondrnts vcre in the 40.0110 to 70.000 range. TABLE: 3 AVERAGE SIZE OF RESPONDENTS (Ill Renrvblr 11. F1.) Sumer: 'Ib1a1 amd prrrrnulew n,mmnn; 'oil F.rruumir 11)(11.1 nal una! N!G'•G Joe n•nuuu]iuq. G:u<uhiu11:3..e„riatrx. The aee rage size of reslr)odcnts was 59,431 rcnlahlC sy. 11. Isee Table 21. TABLE 2 AVERAGE SIZE OF RESPONDENTS (ht X'-wabl' Sy. 14. I Total Rentable Sy. Pt. 9.279,113 \u.of Reypoudenu 15W .%%erupt` Size 59.481 "Tn'o diri rrnl per: 1141• rrnmulr sq. li. Sorrell: :lura.... cmnpurrd lar Ecwmmie Cuu.vairiuq :I,.��rrnrrs. Kespondents fuihticS ranted in size from 13.000 rentable sq. ft. m ovCT 16511.110(1. An analysts of respondnus b%" tentablc 'Ll. It. is silm,11 in T.1h1e 3. It 'Thr Western Region of the Self Stora a Association had the largest number of respondurim follott'ccl 111% the Southeast region (,ec -I aW 4).'I'his is consistent with fact that rhe former is the lamest, in ECTItIS of membership. A list of stales by SSA Region is provided in Appcodii TABLE 4 RESPONSE BY REGION NUMBER ao OF TOTAL 111.1100-19.999 ;3 I..IL 20.MO--29 999 6 3.8.; :30.3100-:39.:199 18 l 1.5-1 40.000-4q.999 29 18.59 50.000-59.999 33 21.15 6(1100-69999 27 17.31 711.000-79.999 13 8.3:3 80.000-89.999 12 7.1i9 911.000 99.999 8 5,1:3 100.1100-109.999 4 2.56 I ]0A(1O-1 19.999 1 0.64 1201100-129999 I 0.6114 160.000 1 6g.994 I 0.114 Total I i6 9899 ":•' Sumer: 'Ib1a1 amd prrrrnulew n,mmnn; 'oil F.rruumir 11)(11.1 nal una! N!G'•G Joe n•nuuu]iuq. G:u<uhiu11:3..e„riatrx. The aee rage size of reslr)odcnts was 59,431 rcnlahlC sy. 11. Isee Table 21. TABLE 2 AVERAGE SIZE OF RESPONDENTS (ht X'-wabl' Sy. 14. I Total Rentable Sy. Pt. 9.279,113 \u.of Reypoudenu 15W .%%erupt` Size 59.481 "Tn'o diri rrnl per: 1141• rrnmulr sq. li. Sorrell: :lura.... cmnpurrd lar Ecwmmie Cuu.vairiuq :I,.��rrnrrs. Kespondents fuihticS ranted in size from 13.000 rentable sq. ft. m ovCT 16511.110(1. An analysts of respondnus b%" tentablc 'Ll. It. is silm,11 in T.1h1e 3. It 'Thr Western Region of the Self Stora a Association had the largest number of respondurim follott'ccl 111% the Southeast region (,ec -I aW 4).'I'his is consistent with fact that rhe former is the lamest, in ECTItIS of membership. A list of stales by SSA Region is provided in Appcodii TABLE 4 RESPONSE BY REGION lLma aur 1111a1 100 due Io rounding NU:ABER m OF TOTAL Norcheast 25 1.5.82 Central 19 18.35 Southeast 48 :W."% West 56 35.44 Total 158 99.99"•,` lLma aur 1111a1 100 due Io rounding There were some differences in he region in the average size of respondents in rentable sq. ft, when compared to the total response. The Central and Western Region respondents were larger thus those in the Northeast and Southeast Rrgions (see Table 5). TABLE 5 RESPONDENT SIZE BY REGION (fn Rentable Sq. Fr.) Oor respnrtdrnr %rnm rare of Ares,- rCgiurs diel not Gsr Swoer: Tnrnls mrcl7rrTrr'nrgrlrs ronyrnral bel Ee�rnnmir Cunsnhigq: issarinlra. Tiles also had more spares (see Table (i). TABLE 6 RESPONDENT SIZE (let \':urtbrr'n(Sparn'j SO. FT. NO. RESPONSES AV. SIZE Northeast 1,402),8R4 25 56,115 Central 1,797,708 29 61.990 Southeast 2,6942w 47' .57.323 West 3,38.1.318 55* 61,53:11 Total 9,279,11:3 15(i 59,441 Oor respnrtdrnr %rnm rare of Ares,- rCgiurs diel not Gsr Swoer: Tnrnls mrcl7rrTrr'nrgrlrs ronyrnral bel Ee�rnnmir Cunsnhigq: issarinlra. Tiles also had more spares (see Table (i). TABLE 6 RESPONDENT SIZE (let \':urtbrr'n(Sparn'j Sonrrr: Ibid TRAFFIC GENERATION An average of 6.82 vehicles per dap entered these facilities for evere 100 self storage spaces, according to our stud% re>ulrs (sec Table 7). TABLE 7 TRAFFIC GENERATED BY SELF STORAGE Vehicles Entering; Pacililies,Dae 596.5 Total SpaceS In Facilities 87413 Average R'T's Per Spacer Per Dae .11652 Av R%T's Per Dae!Per 100 Storage Spaces 111.52 This mcanS that Ila flt ME%• had 500 ,linage space•, it would generate an average of 34 cars per day. For M. it world average 48 (,see Trailic Generator Calculator in 1,11111V N). TABLE 8 TRAFFIC GENERATOR CALCULATOR (13a.+rd Ou ti .Sp rrhu h, )yr I (lli sr!l.vrnrr(gr ,apnrr. ) Num EEP OF Av. VEHICLES SPACES GENCHATEO 100 SPACES No. OF RESPONSES AV. SIZE IN SPACES Northeast 1'2.189 25 500 CcIIIIJI 15.736 114 54:11 Southeast 2 5, 18 11 411, 525 West 34,006 56 6117 Tnlal 87,41:1 153 553 Sonrrr: Ibid TRAFFIC GENERATION An average of 6.82 vehicles per dap entered these facilities for evere 100 self storage spaces, according to our stud% re>ulrs (sec Table 7). TABLE 7 TRAFFIC GENERATED BY SELF STORAGE Vehicles Entering; Pacililies,Dae 596.5 Total SpaceS In Facilities 87413 Average R'T's Per Spacer Per Dae .11652 Av R%T's Per Dae!Per 100 Storage Spaces 111.52 This mcanS that Ila flt ME%• had 500 ,linage space•, it would generate an average of 34 cars per day. For M. it world average 48 (,see Trailic Generator Calculator in 1,11111V N). TABLE 8 TRAFFIC GENERATOR CALCULATOR (13a.+rd Ou ti .Sp rrhu h, )yr I (lli sr!l.vrnrr(gr ,apnrr. ) Num EEP OF Av. VEHICLES SPACES GENCHATEO 100 7 200 Il :300 Zll 4110 27 5110 1 600 I] 700 4N ,Slit) 55 400 6l 1.0110 6N 1.100 75 1;200 S2 1,:3011 89 1.400 :15 1.500 102 1.600 104 1.7110 Illi Phis is I('Ss than the N.33 %chicles per da% per It)() Spaces Ih:11 the found it) 0111 149(11 ..olds pertinnual for the 0. ti c:_ �.._ _ 01O, c ti m coo o a GLn t 00 C Mv O] m O O C r- O00 O .0CDa o a CO d R CO d E E a e �; Memo To: Planning & Zoning Commission From: Tambi Katieb, Director of Community Developme v Eric Heidemann, Senior Planner f)'-"� Date: February 2, 2006 Re: Confluence (Riverfront Subdivision) PUD — Draft Riverfront Village Design Standards Summary: On January 17, 2006 the Planning & Zoning Commission forwarded a recommendation of conditional approval for the PUD Amendment application submitted by East West Partners for the Confluence PUD ("Riverfront Subdivision'). In forwarding this recommendation to the Town Council, the Commission adopted the staff recommended condition that the final PUD Development plan was conditioned upon approval of site specific design standards. The minimum criteria to be addressed in these standards was attached to Resolution 06-01, and the approval of these minimums would be forwarded to the Town Council and incorporated in the PUD approval by second reading of the Ordinance. In order for Council to find PUD Design Criteria 17.20.110(h) (2), (3), and (6) approvable, the Commission will need to forward a final version of the design standards to Council for incorporation into the PUD approval. The applicant has submitted a draft of the minimum design criteria for your review and consideration. Unfortunately, the submittal did not afford staff the time to prepare a detailed report, however, we suggest that this initial review engage the applicant and their architects in detailing how the design standards (not guidelines) correspond to the massing model and reinforce the goals of the PUD plan that was forwarded to Council for final action several weeks ago. Please bring the Confluence applications with you. Illustrative perspectives, the approved site plan and the massing model will also be available for this discussion and review. Staff recommends tabling any action on the design standards of the PUD application after review and comment by the Commission to your February 21, 2006 hearing RAPlanning & Zoning Cortvniwion\Me \20061Rivaf=t Design StarAw&doc Attachments: 1/ Draft Riverfront Village Design Guidelines (dated Feb. 1, 2006) 2/ Resolution No, 06-01 BPIar g & Za g CommissionVde \2006Utimftwt Design Stmtdards.dw 3 tii�u :P1 �jr� "yi r.,N till TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-01 A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A PUD AMENDMENT APPLICATION AMENDING THE CONFLUENCE PUD, AS MORE SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED IN THE APPLICATION DATED AUGUST 8, 2005. WHEREAS, East West Partners Inc. has filed an application to amend the existing Planned Unit Development ("PUD") and Development Agreement for the Confluence PUD; and WHEREAS, the proper posting, publication and public notices for the hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon were provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon held a public hearings on October 180', November 1, November 15`h, December 6`h, and December 20th of 2005 and January 17`h, 2006 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 and Development Agreement; and WHEREAS, following such public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission forwarded its recommendation for approval on the PUD amendment application to the Town Council of the Town of Avon through Resolution 06-01; WHEREAS, said application appears to comply with the following PUD review criteria set forth in Section 17.12.110 of the Avon Municipal Code, including the following: 1. Conformance with the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan's and Town Center Implementation Plan Goals and Policies as required by 17.20.110H (1); 2. The overall design concept of this PUD Amendment conforms to the design theme of the Town, and Design Guidelines as required by 17.20.110H(2); 3. The project is compatible with the immediate scale and character of existing properties in the vicinity. 17.20.110H(3); 4. This PUD Amendment application is responsive and compatible to the existing surrounding land -uses. 17.20.110H (4); 5. The PUD Amendment application has identified and proposes to mitigate or avoid natural or geologic features. 17.20.11 OH (5); 6. The site plan, building design and location and open space provisions are designed to produce a functional development responsive and sensitive to natural features, vegetation and overall aesthetic quality of the community. 17.20.110H (6); 7. The circulation system is designed for both vehicles and pedestrians addressing on and off site traffic circulation that is compatible with the Town Transportation Plan. 17.20.110H (7); 8. This PUD Amendment application has created functional open space that is responsive to existing views and buffers to open space. 17.20.110H(8); 9. The subdivision plan 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. 17.20.110H (9); 10. Adequacy of public services such as sewer, water, schools, transportation systems, roads, parks, and police and fire protection has been established. 17.20.11 OH (10); and 11. 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. 17.20.11 OH (11). WHEREAS, this PUD Amendment provides evidence of compliance with the public purpose provisions outlined in Section 17.28.085 of the Municipal Code, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends approval to the Town Council for the amendment of the Confluence PUD Amendment application dated August 8, 2005 with the following conditions: 1. Required revisions to the Development Plan: A. Delete General Notes 7a, 7b, and 7c, and revise as follows: "A fifty-five (55) foot view corridor through the public plaza adjacent to the proposed hotel as presented on the development plan and the final plat for the Riverfront Subdivision shall remain unobstructed from the ground level upwards, with the exception of the gondola terminal. Minor encroachments such as awnings, landscaping, overhangs, decks and railings shall be reviewed and may be approved through the design review approval process". B. Delete General Note #1 and revise as follows: Professional offices, including real estate offices, shall be limited to the two locations on the public plaza as depicted to the Planning and Zoning Commission January 17, 2006. A temporary timeshare sales office will be permitted in the hotel and must be vacated within thirty (30) days of issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for Building E (Lot 3). No other plaza level spaces are permitted for use by professional and general office, including financial institutions and real estate offices or residential units. 4 C. Add the following general note: "This PUD Plan contains the development standards and uses for the Riverfront PUD. Other uses and provisions of the Town of Avon Zoning Code not specifically addressed herein, or in the related development agreement, shall apply to the Riverfront PUD." . D. Add the following note: A solar access study showing the effects of shading on adjacent buildings and outdoor spaces is required for all proposed buildings exceeding 3 stories in height. Sun studies should be prepared on a site plan of a scale not less than 1"=40' showing shadows at 10 am and 3pm on March 21, June 21, September 21, and December 21. E. The maximum building height shall be as follows: i. Hotel, Timeshare and Whole Ownership- as depicted on Land Use Table of PUD Development Plan dated January 12, 2006. ii. In all instances, the maximum allowable percentage of a building ridgeline to be at or near the maximum height shall be governed by the more restrictive criteria of the Riverfront Design Standards and the Town of Avon Design Review Guidelines. F. Final approval of this PUD Development plan is conditioned upon approval of site specific design standards ("Riverfront Design Standards") by the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council, incorporated on the PUD Development Plan and recorded at the time of approval of the PUD. The criteria, at a minimum, shall include design elements as outlined in Exhibit A to Resolution 06-01. 2. Parking Conditions: A. Delete General Note #8 and revise as follows: "A parking management plan, generally consistent with recommendations outlined in the Walker Preliminary Parking Operations Plan dated December 5, 2005 shall be submitted and, after review and approval by the Zoning Administrator, be recorded as a covenant with by issuance of Certificate of Occupancy. The approved plan shall not be changed without notification of the Town, and shall be enforceable by the Zoning Administrator". 3. General Conditions: A. Water Rights: The property owner shall convey to the Town the water rights necessary to serve the approved development. Final water right determination shall be resolved between the property owner and the Town prior to the recording of a Final Plat. B. Revise General Note #10 to add the following: Additional Commercial GLFA exceeding the PUD maximum may be approved for restaurant, bars, cocktail lounges and similar uses subject to a Special Review Use. C. Revise General Note #12 to: Office space above but not on the public plaza level may be converted to Residential/Lodging uses provided the maximum number of Dwelling Units is not exceeded after such conversion. Required parking shall be recalculated after taking into account such conversion and any excess parking spaces may then be individually deeded. D. The property owner shall submit a master landscaping and public plaza design plan for Lots 1-7, including Tract A, to be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission prior to issuance of the first building permit for the hotel. E. Tract "A" shall be deeded to the Town and zoned "Open Space, Landscaping and Drainage" in accordance with section 17.20.120 of the Municipal Code prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy but no later than January 1, 2008. F. The Affordable Housing requirement shall be determined by Council if amended from the existing 10% Yequirement. G. The property owner shall construct the proposed Westin Hotel or equivalent, Public Plaza, and gondola as generally submitted in the August 3, 2005 application. Significant changes to the hotel brand or brand equivalent, public plaza, conceptual architectural illustrations or conveyance to the Beaver Creek Landing shall require a major amendment to the PUD. H. A revised development agreement shall incorporate and reference the approved PUD Development Plan, including all conditions of approval specified in Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution 06-01. I. Except as otherwise modified by this pen -nit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. ADOPTED THIS 17"DAY OF January, 2006 Signed: "'0�5 t Date: ! q16(. Chris Evans, Chair Att st: V Date: Phil Struve, Secretary Exhibit "A" to Resolution 06-01 Riverfront Subdivision Minimum Design Standards The (Westin) Riverfront Subdivision Design Standards, incorporated on the PUD Development Plan, shall include minimum standards for the design that will supplement the Town of Avon Design Review Guidelines. The approval of these Design Standards shall be required and incorporated as part of the PUD Development Plan final approval. Design standards shall address the following areas: Architectural Goal and Objectives: inant style Project: Establish theme and quality for the entire project , define the predomedomi ant and characteristics of buildings and the interface with both public spaces, p views and the natural environment. Site Design: Solar Access: A solar access study shall be required for buildings exceeding 3 stories located in the subdivision. Building Entry: General requirements for emphasis on building entries. Site materials palette: A list of suitable materials and colors for all public plaza areas, including facing material for all necessary retaining walls. Building Height, Massing & Scale: Street/Pedestrian Level, All Buildings: Defined minimum window areas, materials palette, and minimum use of stone on each building. Wall Facades, facades fronting the public plaza, and sin Plaza: Define entifi dminimum ximum height f setback ata horizontal or all g elevation above that height. All Buildings: A defined maximum percentage of wall planes, a defined minimum break. in wall planes for all elevations. Maximum Heights, All Buildings: Define maximum percentage of ridge heights that may be at the allowable height, a defined minimum setback of those ridges from the public plaza. Exterior Wells and Surfaces: Materials: Material palette, color palette, prohibited materials. Retaining walls: Facing material and color palette. All buildings: Prohibited materials and finishes, minimum materials on all elevations. All buildings: Material and color palette, minimum detailing, construction technique, and size/proportionality guidelines. All buildings: Minimum roof pitch, roof material palette (including LRV), maximum uninterrupted roof planes, minimum overhang length Signs: Project: General style, materials and color palette to form the basis of a Master Sign Program for the entire project. RIVERFRONT VILLAGE DESIGN GUIDELINES February 1, 2006 DRAFT I. Vision Statement for Riverfront Village A. Architectural Theme Riverfront Village represents an important interface between the Town of Avon and Beaver Creek Ski Resort. It is envisioned as a lively gathering place connecting the river, mountain and town- a pedestrian friendly environment where townspeople and guests can stroll from Avon's western Town Center, through the resort retail plaza, to ride the gondola up to the mountain or to step down to the river. • The village is situated on the seam between the town and the mountain landscape and should therefore strike a balance between the two environments, creating an architectural expression that captures both alpine and townscape traditions. To achieve this balance, the architecture should take advantage of the "noble" materials inherent to successful mountain resort architecture—such as stone, wood, and other natural materials, combined with more contemporary materials such as stucco and metal. • The Architectural Theme should also feature use of large areas of glass, clean building forms based on pure geometries, simple but honest detailing (not rustic or overstated), and proportions appropriate to the larger scale of the Town. B. Design of Public Spaces • A public plaza should be used to link the Town of Avon to the Eagle River. This link should be reinforced in both a physical and perceptual way through the use of paving materials, landscaping, and sensitive spatial planning. C. Pedestrian orientation • A pedestrian corridor, connecting the town to a retail plaza with gondola, should gracefully transition from the plaza to the riverfront promenade by way of a staircase and stepped terraces merging with the natural landscape. • Pathways should also create a network within the Village itself, linking the different buildings along the length of the site and providing pedestrian access to defined access/gathering points along the River. The Plaza and pathways within Riverfront Village should encourage a pedestrian -friendly environment. Riverfmnt Village February 1, 2006 Draft Design Guidelines Page 1 of 5 D. View Corridors • A primary southern view corridor to the mountains should be maintained from the eastern railroad crossing through the public plaza to help reinforce the connection between the Town and the ski mountain. • An east -west view corridor along the Eagle River should also be maintained through the preservation of a 75 -foot river setback in most portions of the site. E. The Natural Environment • The Eagle River is a primary amenity for the Town of Avon and Riverfront Village. Links to the River should be developed as special pedestrian ways to help activate this wonderful amenity. • The 75 -foot river setback should be largely left in its natural state, certain defined river access and gathering points should be created along the linear riverfront path. • In general, additional plantings within the river setback should be riparian in character and relate to plantings indigenous to river edge environments. More formal planting areas are encouraged, however, at special gathering and access points to highlight these features. II. Site and Village Guidelines A. Primary Building Entries • Primary building entries should be emphasized as welcoming portals through careful attention to massing, scale, and materials. • Massing of entries should relate to the overall massing of the building but be presented as special forms different than typical building bays. Sensitivity to scale should be considered when transitioning from the overall building mass to the more intimate scale of the pedestrian visitor. Materials should be used in novel ways at primary building entries to reinforce their unique role as part of the building and as part of the overall Village streetscape. B. Solar Access • A solar access study shall be required for buildings exceeding 3 stories in height These studies will convey shading impacts at summer and winter solstice Qun 21 and Dec 21), and at veinal and autumnal equinox (Mar 21 and Sept 21). Riverfront Village February 1, 2006 Draft Design Guidelines Page 2 of 5 C. Site Materials and Colors 1. Plaza materials • Rustic materials and/or a more contemporary interpretation of rustic materials such as cut stone pavers, colored concrete pavers, concrete slabs, and the like are appropriate to the Village. Colors should be complementary to the site and its architecture, avoiding bright or brilliant hues that distract from the pedestrian experience. 2. Site walls • Site walls should make use of more contemporary materials such as concrete block, stained concrete, and similar materials, but in colors complementary to the site and its buildings. Site walls should relate to plaza materials and building bases to help visually merge the ground plane around the site. D. Site Signage — Design, materials, and colors • To be consistent and compatible with the design and materiality of the buildings. III.Architectural Design Guidelines A. Building Form and Massing • Building form and massing should be in keeping with the general Town of Avon Design Guidelines and incorporate form articulation to avoid the monolithic. • Smaller masses, such as portions of the building or elements such as Porte cocheres, etc, should be used to break up the apparent size of larger building forms. Smaller masses positioned in front of large masses help to reduce the visual dominance of the larger forms. • The development of building bases should help to tie together individual buildings within the Village and should also tie the Village to its riverfront site. Site walls, and other site features should relate to building bases in a way that reinforces visual connectivity to the ground plane. The plaza and gondola terminal, with its cantilevered structure should stand out as an elevated element from the south, drawing people up from the river. • In general the middles of buildings should be more visually subtle, but broken by primary and secondary elevation features and material accents that help to avoid monotonous facades. On any given elevation SO percent of the vertical wall area will be permitted to be within the same plane, with a minimum of 18 inch offset for plane changes. • The roofscape of Riverfront Village is also critical to the success of the neighborhood and its relationship to the Town of Avon. The visual coherency of the Village should be reinforced through the use of similar roofing materials and colors throughout the Village, helping to knit the individual buildings together when seen from the Gondola or Beaver Creek above. Riverfront Village February 1, 2006 Draft Design Guidelines Page 3 of 5 Pitched roofs expressive of an alpine tradition and the incorporation of dormers, shed roofs and chimney forms, should be employed. Primary roofs will have pitches ranging from a minimum of 2:12 to a maximum of 12:12. Secondary roofs—such as at dormers, Porte cocheres, building protrusions, and similar additive forms—may be flat, but only if they are finished in materials similar in quality to roof or wall materials on the building, such as pavers, colored stone, etc. The primary roofs of the Hotel will be defined as the roofs matching the pitch and character of the tower element roof—the shed dormers at the wings of the Hotel are not considered primary roofs. Flat roofs are not permitted for primary roof fortes. Ideally flat roofs should be developed as terraces and other functional spaces. • Given the modem alpine character of the architecture at Riverfront Village no minimum roof overhang shall be specified. • While the buildings on Lots 1, 2 & 3 will cluster together to form the Village core with the Hotel as the taller defining centerpiece, the building on Lot 4 will stand a bit more in isolation. The help ensure that roof ridges for the building on Lot 4 remain interesting and contribute to the overall success of building massing, uninterrupted ridgelines are to be avoided. To this end, for the building on Lot 4, only one -thud of the overall building ridge length may be contiguous at the same height above sea level until a break (elevation change) in the ridge is required. These breaks (elevation changes) shall run horizontally for at least 10% of the overall building ridge length before returning to the prior elevation. Overall building ridge length is defined as the sum of all primary ridge lengths for the entire building. Due to the short lengths of buildings on Lots 5, 6 & 7, no ridge break restrictions shall by applied to these buildings. B. Building Height • Building heights for the Rivetfront Village will be restricted to the heights described in the approved Development Plan, as measured according to the Town of Avon Code. Architectural features such as chimneys, cupolas, and other similar elements will not be included when calculating maximum building height. • In addition, the percentage of ridge height allowed at the maximum allowable building height for any given building will be limited to 60% of the overall building ridge length. Overall building ridge length is defined as the sum of all primary ridge lengths for the entire building. • The maximum height for building facades fronting the Public Plaza will be 100 feet from the Plaza elevation. • The minimum horizontal setback required for building facades exceeding the maximum height for building facades fronting the Public Plaza will be 2 feet from the building facade fronting the Public Plaza. • The minimum setback required for maximum allowable height per the Development Standards from the Public Plaza will be 60 feet from budding fagade fronting the Plaza Riverfront Village February 1, 2006 Draft Design Guidelines Page 4 of 5 C. Exterior Materials, Detailing, and Colors 1. Materials and colors for walls and roofs at Rivetfront Village will have a Light Reflective Value (LRV) not exceeding 60%. • Materials inherent to the mountains, including stone and wood, should be used at lower levels of buildings in areas of direct pedestrian interface as well as metals. These "noble" materials should be used in refreshing ways within the Village, reinterpreted for the urban nature of Avon towards a "mountain modern" character. • Stucco conveys mass in a subtle, "quiet" way and is therefore a recommended material for building middles and tops. However, building accents comprised of non -stucco materials, such as metal, wood and cement materials replicating wood, shall be allowed in building middles and tops to help provide interest • Roof materials may include rubber shingles, asphalt shingles and other materials suitable for mountain environments. Standing seam metal shall not be used for primary roof planes, but may be used for small and/or special roof features such as shed dormers, retail roof forms, porte cocheres, and other selective roof elements. • In general, colors used within the Village should be complementary to the site, and be comprised of greens, grays, golds, browns, and other earth -tone hues. However, due to the desire for a highly activated retail experience at the Plaza level, the colors used along the retail edges of the Public way may be more vibrant and active in nature. 2. Minimum window area at plaza level • At a minimum, 40% of the vertical square footage of the 1" level of building facades facing the plaza from the east and the west shall be glass and or openings in the fa4ade (include breezeway openings). For this calculation the plaza shall be deemed to begin at the northwest comer of the hotel and the northeast comer of timeshare west and shall terminate at the east -west plane where the staircase down to the river begins. This calculation shall exclude the gondola terminal, control booth and public resrooms. END OFDRAFT DESIGN GUIDELINES February 1, 2006 Rivexfront Village Draft Design Guidelines Page 5 of 5 r Staff Report ,i FINAL DESIGN PLAN AVON C O L O R A D O February 7, 2005 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date January 31, 2006 Project type Duplex Legal description Lot 10, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Zoning 2 Units - Residential Duplex Address 4010 Wildridge Road West Introduction The applicant is proposing a Final Design application for a duplex residence. The duplex measures approximately 9,400 square feet (4,671 sq.ft.- west unit, 4,681 sq.ft. - east unit) with a maximum building height of approximately 30'. The proposed materials include a combination of asphalt shingles and cor-ten roof material, cedar clapboard siding, alum -clad windows, and stone veneer. The Final Design is consistent with the comments received during sketch review and adheres to the Residential Design Guidelines. The subject property is a steep uphill lot located on the northwest corner of Wildridge Road and Bear Trap Road. The property presents significant design challenges primarily due to the nature of the topography and access location. The applicant has addressed staff's prior concerns relative to grading, use of retaining walls, and treatment of exposed slopes. Because the lot contains 40% or greater slopes and the depth of the lot is relatively shallow, the structure is required to be cut into the hillside with extensive site retainage. However, the applicant has mitigated this condition with retaining walls that appear natural and the use of landscaping between walls. On December 20th, 2005 the Commission reviewed the sketch design application. The comments generated during sketch design review included whether there was sufficient parking and vehicle turning radius and the use of retaining walls. The Commission comments also indicated an appreciation of the architecture particularly with the variation in material and roof form. The Commsiion encouraged the use of pines as buffers to the retaining walls. The applicant has submitted a letter from an engineer (see attached) conceptually approving the retaining walls, but it is unclear whether the letter was based on the proposed design. Staff is recommending that a condition of approval be added to confirm the engineer's acceptance of all retaining walls proposed in the site plan, including several boulder walls that appear to exceed 4' in height. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 It Lot 10, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision - Final Design February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 5 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: The proposed duplex residence is a permitted use on the site. • Density: The lot is zoned for a duplex and the density is appropriate. • Lot Coverage: Maximum site coverage allowed for under the Wildridge PUD is 50%. This project is in compliance with the PUD, proposing 15% lot coverage. • Setbacks: The setbacks for the property are typical for Wildridge with a 25' front setback and 10' side and rear yard building setbacks. All building setbacks have been adhered too. • Easements: Utility and Drainage Easements of 7.5' in width border each side of the property. There is a 10' Utility and Drainage Easement on the south side of the property. • Building Height: The maximum allowable building height for this property is 35.' This design is in compliance with the applicable zoning with ridge heights ranging from 161" (lowest) to 307' (highest). A framing Improvement Location Certificate will be required to be submitted and approved by the Town. • Grading/Drainage: All existing and proposed grade contours are clearly indicated on the site plan. It appears that there is adequate room for drainage around the structure. There appears to be several areas where drainpipes will be utilized below the structure. • Parking: A minimum of 6 parking spaces is required for this project. This design is in compliance with the Zoning Code, proposing 6 garage parking spaces and sufficient area for 6 additional spaces. • Snow Storage: Two separate areas are called out on the Site Plan designated for storage. The areas on the site plan for snow storage appear to be functional and the majority of the driveway should benefit from sun exposure. However, it is unclear the total area proposed for storage. It appears to be insufficient and would ask the applicant to demonstrate at the time of the hearing. • Landscaping: The total irrigated area appears to comply with the Town's 20% maximum irrigated area requirement and a mixture of trees, shrubs, and groundcover, and sod are proposed. 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. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 10, Block 3, W ildridge Subdivision - Final Design February 7. 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 5 3. Whether adequate development rights exist for the proposed improvements. Adequate development rights exist on the property for up to two dwelling units. 4. The Final Design plan is in general conformance with Sub -Sections A through D of the Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Design Guidelines. A. Site Development: o Site Design: The site layout and building location appear to be appropriate for this property in light of the elevated building envelope and difficult site access conditions. The access drive features a figure eight to accommodate circulation to both residences. This design solution was discussed during sketch review and seems to be functional and eliminate the need for additional retaining walls. o Site Access: According to the Design Guidelines (Table 1.0), driveway grades should not exceed 10%. The driveway entrance and grades are consistent with the Guidelines with a maximum 8% grade. o Parking and Loading: The minimum parking standards have been adhered to with this design. B. Building Design: o Building Materials and Colors: A variety of high quality building materials are proposed with this application including: asphalt shingle and cor-ten roof material, cedar clapboard siding, alum -clad windows, and stone veneer. All of the proposed building colors are earthtone and should be appropriate for the site and neighborhood. A color board will be available for review at the work session on the meeting date. o Exterior Walls, Roofs, and Architectural Interest: The building's massing is broken up with varying roof planes, materials, and architectural interest. There are a variety of roof forms with asphalt shingles, and the sloping roof forms utilize corrugated metal. The roof pitch through out the project varies from 2.5:12 to 8:12. According to the Guidelines, roof pitches should be a minimum of 3:12 for metal roofs. Staff has no objection to the proposed roof pitches. o Outdoor Lighting: Lighting cut sheets has been provided for one building mounted lights and one pole mounted fixture. The proposed fixtures are in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. C. Landscaping: o Retaining Walls: There are several boulder retaining walls and structural walls proposed for the project. The boulder retaining walls are staggered throughout the site, and all are proposed at less than four feet in height with the exception of one. The proposed design also includes several Achorstone "Highland Concrete Block retaining walls. Staff has asked the applicant to provide Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 10, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision - Final Design February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 5 sections and a description of material used on the surface of the walls during the hearing. The applicant is also proposing landscaping in the terraces of the proposed walls. Staff has asked the applicant to provide evidence from the engineer of record relative to the possibility to provide plantings between the walls. The site plan appears to have demonstrated positive drainage away from the structure. This is accomplished through the use of boulder walls, significant grading, and several drainpipes. o Design Character. The provided Landscape Plan appears to comply with the Residential Landscaping Guidelines. Limited amounts of sod are proposed on the site and the plant material is drought tolerant. 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 and compliment the existing grades. The structure would be dug into the hillside with the majority of the lower level buried on the north elevations. Site disturbance appears to be limited to the property, yet this site layout and staging may be difficult to achieve without disturbing the neighboring property due to excavation and the construction of retaining walls. 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. Although the proposed structure will be highly visible from Wildridge Road, the scale of the development is similar to other duplex structures in the neighborhood and is in compliance with all applicable zoning standards. The architectural style of this project has remained relatively unchanged and should have a positive appearance as viewed from neighboring properties. The applicant has proposed high quality materials and earth tone colors that should make this project compatible with the surrounding environment. It is also important to note that staff has received no public comment regarding the proposed design. 7. The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired. Staff does not feel that any monetary or aesthetic values will be impaired with the proposed improvements. 8. The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Lot 10, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision - Final Design February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 5 The project is in general conformance with the Town's adopted goals and policies and is a use by right per the Wildridge Subdivision. Staff Recommendation Staff is recommending conditional approval of this final design plan for Lot 10, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision. Recommended Motion "I move to approve the final design plan for a Lot 10, Block 3, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision with the following conditions to be resolved prior to a building permit submittal: 1. The property owner shall demonstrate a minimum of 20% impervious surface of on-site snow storage. 2. The property owner shall submit a letter accepting the design of all retaining walls depicted on the site plan form a registered Colorado Engineer. 3. A framing Improvement Location Certificate will be required to be submitted and approved by the Town. 4. Project staging must be submitted and approved at building permit. 5. The railing or guardrail design to be placed along the driveway at the top of the retaining wall on the east side of the property must be demonstrated and approved by staff. 6. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me at 748- 4009, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted„ Eri idem n nior Planner Exhibits: Materials and Lighting Reduced Plan Set of Avon Community Development (970).748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 APPENDIX 3(b): Final Design Plan Application & Checklist FINAL DESIGN 10,HFP. sC';dj�TOCI I%FOWJAT.l::fl a.a� elraf� saedhhNn r �— �'�•MAtl°'°'° IZ.d'Id LJ. Type of Pro cc IJ Sif44 Fes* 0 shA6F.nilr Cl Addison 0 cwcwcw 0 Wdudrirl POIW.tld I*r PrOod DOWW" (arch. aqu, mawda% Odom, haWWL unique feaam. ata) I (ore) r4~l Mil M irlimOtign provided ro the Toon d Avon In awmaeden with MY sppinatlon Y We rW correct that I (na) Ms T rOpiAtiwU epyist0le ro dIY pralarL and Wderetend MW #map" suemdres xi'daj/y dsgnales'Appinnt' as Indlwtlee W40 a ownefiLeweeentedw n tdl aapegden IMW ro roleq. f 7 t .tea fknmiunanMapw./a rose, m.A.iM1 co Mara•Pown mm,•a..o]a fu lelgaflaw w,..r.n tncoan Par•aefs Town otAvon Residential, Commerdal, and Industdal Design Review Guidelines P E D Adopted November 6.2D01 / Revised May 24, 2005 JAN 2 0 2006 Community Development I'd 6E806/.6[DL61 aoagTgojW Rgjap uuy steart bnenett COLOR and MATERIALS BOARD:. Final design review submittal 1/19/06 4010 Wildridge Road West - Lot 10, Block 3 Exterior Building Materials Material Description and/or color Exterior Siding Cedar Clapboard Siding Benjamin Moore Moorwood Semi -Trans. Sea Gull Gray 72 Exterior Win/Dr/Corner Trim Cedar Benjamin Moore Moorwood Semi -Trans. Forest Mushroom Timber Beams/Accents & Benjamin Moore Trans. Siding Stain - Cedar 16 Fascia above cor-ten siding app. Garage Doors Cedar minimal gap shiplap siding, Benjamin Moore Solid Stain - Redwood 20 Roofing and selective siding Cor -ten AZP Asphalt Shingles Elk Roofing Prestique Plus High Definition - Weathere %vood Window and patio doors Alum -clad Jeldwen - P423 Chestnut Bronze Exterior stone Telluride Gold or Vogelmann's Brown Terraces Stained concrete to match ext. stone or Sandstone Pavers Site Retaining system Anchorstone "Highland" Stone (conc. block system) Exterior Light Fixtures F1 Kichler 904406 - Outdoor Olde Brick Wall Sconce (Re: plans for locations) F2 Kichler 15310AZT - Path/Garden Architectural Bronze (Quantity 9, along exterior entry walks) dkav ._7 JAN202M Cemmuniry peveiopment lighting fixtures, light fixturesSAME AS rage I or r _ y'01 o Wdclr�Aq C �ci` vj ORIGINAL BROWSE OUR CATALOG Enter Item No. Height: 8' Width: 11' Number of Bulbs: 1 Maximum Wattage: 15OW Bulb Base: Medium Voltage: 120V Style: Casual Bulbs: bulb not included 904406 Outdoor Olde Brick Outdoor Wall 1Lt Incandescent Body Material: Shippable N UL and/or CSA listed use: View other products in the Grenoble family. Rr0E1'j « Back JAN 2 0 2006 Back To TQommunity Develop, Photographs and drawings herein on each individual page are the property of Kichler and Kichlees written consent. Kichler® Lighting reserves the right to make changes to the pi Product Information may also change. Every effort will be made to keep the site curve however no guarantees are made In this regard. Powered by $0 0RAmomatrix' ® 2006 All Rights Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the User Ar This website is optimized for the following browsers: Netscape Navigator 7 a_. and Internet Explorer 6 and higher. .r UA http://www.kichler.com/kichlercatalog.jsp 1/19/2006 Kichler - Product Details SANTE A5 ORIGINAL i BROWSE bu4 CATALOG Enter Item No. CI rk :c SFf PRICVlG aid SHOP ONIINF �--� Height: 21' Width: 8.25' Number of Bulbs: 1 Maximum Wattage: 16W Bulb Base: Wedge T5 Voltage: 12V Style: Casual Bulbs: bulb included 1::�z L5310AZT Path/Garden Architectural Bronze Path & Spread Ut Lndscpi2 Extra Lead Wire Provide Shade Dimension: i Body Material: Alco Shippable via UP UL and/or CSA listed use: Suitable RECCE v Z_) n Back JAN 2 0 2006 Community Devetopmenr Back To Top Photographs and drawings herein on each individual page are the property of Kichler and may Kichler's written consent. Kichler® Lighting reserves the right to make changes to the produc Product information may also change.will be made to keep he site current In however o guarantees are made in thisregard Powered by'rt' BRAN0n10tf IX' ® 2006 All Rights Reserve( Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of the User Agreemen This website is optimized for the following ingExpbrows er 8 and Netscape Navigator 7 and h and ...:a—t iYin nnfc I A. UJ 83 •-01' \\ \ \' �� 1.1.11\\!i1\ � . `.\ �• \.1i�:� t� \ _ \ �nv q� •1.1... ..'.•1'1.1..•\ �� �- - ^� 1•' 1 � 1.1`.1.1. 1 \� 0 Op 00 1..1.1.cv co \ I I t - .I..tF..l.'.. 11.111. ��°moo � F , I I• I 1 \I I I � j -._ : ' • • •\•x;11\':'�:t.� 1 Q .. I I I I j 1 \,I I - •� '1N 1•'t-'-�•`,' 1 �,ope w \ \•1�.�...�.t.1.1A-; wJ 00 I 1 , Iq 1\•{ 111 J w`` 0 0 I I I 9 w o LLI a. �.so I o II C�-�.. _ o I� I �I =Ln a F a `s AlI��� I I I �- -� A� z�,�� -` I I I „m.�.:'�. .- .:I...-1�.1•''1- I— a � O � o�l I - : ��-•' .-• •'• 1- '�' t:\•.1 N.t I � o 1' I `J i I W z O�LLa I � I >�� �� � - E I I I .I.. .1="�II•••I•. .- i.l.-I'.t I � oY.e a I I I 3..•.....1...'11 Al �O O Io o . J Opt I �� I 1:I': �.: r1.1.. •t.i.. QD wo V.1: I • ®r;z I - _ �� it 1 . I- 1 `: J I 4�0 ,� .. ,.1. o luA. V XO 02 0 w00 I '` •z , V3' 0. :�: �..1.'...J V\'•' 1 J, 4 �_� \ \ A. �.... 1... . `:AN 1 \ v ^ J U \..\.'. \.-.\•' ,' kw pz° Mn- 1s �--�'�'I- ..�• / O I -P tis -'o 1z IZ C., Q r �V .�,,. i Inn"��"�• Door- �!� ® - --- — SII I III'• rj ■ � ill��l Illini.unn wl � I l!� i wnmm 1 1 �� ©�� nrevm t .. ,� �.• �' n....... mn....... 7uf.. r R nmm��nan ivan u - �111171111,.111 � �nnunm�unumnm nl � Innm�nv nniiili�nnlnnrrn i �nn+lnumnu7nnm S� �I� � • � i�ilininiii�in7i���h ■\ N1111.1111111111UA11 nf� �iniinpiiriiiliyiilnniypm�p,�T�nn7 m n' 1► 111 _=moi1 III It A, nmin bra, 1 �yel,°any •��%,. q.r Yty it ��• ���,II ���Gjphii it �iy i�♦ •, 4y�fifb�fii'�3��R yt`ji ..� ...• hili, �i'i'Ni '•�h 1ij Iiy' � yI: S . NO 1 Ez " 4N 7 � My rn E C! co Cl?c CDCNOD •a o �m a N 8CF � O W � ffi '•1 00 O� v E 12 N p $ 8 D C 7 a w m m f3e eto goo h cf)o >< m moi U, an n y N u 1 1 1 1 1 I I 11 I II 1� 1 I I • I I I 1 i I 1 It ,•o.,at \ I I I B I I I ry 1 I II I I 1 I 11 N I , � I I �I �0i 1, I I 1 I I I I I I , I I I I 1 � I , 1 1 I I i I I 1 1 , I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I j I I I 1 1 1 I I / / I 1 r 1 1 I 1 I I II ;o/I I I I I I I I I I I I ••I; - I I I I I I I II I I i m M I I I II I I I I II j I I I It 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I ❑ a I I I it I I I I , II 1 1 I, 1 I I I jll I I, 1 1 1 II I I 1 1 11 1 II I I 11 I I I I , I 1 1 1 I 1 �I II I 1 II I 40 II f0-er \ \ _ g \ \ e u> N � � E o $ Co. m �I �+ o O_ �1m pv .F F E C. E N N • p LL I1 O n� U 0� I � I � I I I ® I I I I I I N w J I I I aQ 1 L LU QQ J� v W s� §m Q ♦, a4 m W � d c I N _Y p N h ap € w o m W� WAN W s � um, Q Z Q a z 3 C --� LL I E 1 I r I ZZ , w L J _ — - —__ ----J § � W W uj •Q I � Z I I I n ;3� I ^f o m 0�� II I nr m W II o I LU 1 m I n o I u ME I t FQ I - I I - I I I I z Q C Q o > o o W y y - ;3107.\ "L o 83 sa $mo m i �rz J e,e e a g Ieo Aga m�rc11i >a a �-mo'a_mma Lo a3rc$' I, 1 11 11 1 Ing a eEs .s�E pF'U V ;:Q:•: �.�-�.I '•r`,�►, , 11113 b�$'o�2 : ms ct'I omso as a art)A yS a� x 38 aoo <`mo $9a A R� ani?i .nvino. ff 0 O�mO.o �I •a:''• \1 1 1 �'m r z3o8�a9o2 m 2 W aU�a ala UrcmY Z ooQm3 i� ..t '•.•..�' � ,� Z 1 1 1111 1 1 111 azJL :�. •.(...•. �,, I 4 \, 1\ °11 111 I a 3 Ea IUl I pW�I1a`�EA$ � � � •:l ,� 1 ,1 LByY�$ �pp � �� `Ey<� a e�a4 E .•�: • I �E I �_� mm �� � � .��' I I ` I I :f��,�e a @� .A� a�€ s $�Fr :'G:• 9s � I '.i\11 11 .Sd�E� H,i$� $ s!�PBn �q I n oIa 3 i I :I rc �1 11 gg=�Ag Eg$gSit€ agA L S ad�$E i If IIII BEr.1 a€$ O I l fI I N I�° 1' I I ►1 �J �• � € llpggE'S� ggE� \ • 11 � I � _< a:�B3< sa!`<<Sbm[�3u�8'�iCE � i I:• � I � - I . { I Y $�=doe Y� ae..a � � Ln `�� I ,:�:• �, :1:1 I I I ,� •1 , 1 cvl €:eYsa�B. ..�;.• __ ;1;1 p Icoae $x$i $ mag =s :lylll a. a a -- 11 111 1 �,I' 1' 1' 1 Ap. -.8@ I1 I U 8 i' s o i $ g Op $.t I ':I: .1,1;1:''.'1;1; 11� J I ,•�•,,I� � � ff���3 t :'J'�'' - ,1:1:1:1•' p 3. "S '882 O t I 1, 1. 1• I'd , I •]n .g M�a.o�"sa�g9�ogE�g$- �qOO I •• p. .1 1:1: N 11 ` 11-o Ee a. g `9Y� p$$a m�J O t •:I:' ' 'i 1,1 1,1, I v' W1� . 3\ I (�� Qgi n�Y S�¢2s`gas $'sa9� t '9 1'1.1'1' 1 11\ •:,. `3 (/ -$: '�i�K$ .`s$Eu e °NI o<-•E<�! �<�'���->Lea :$-$<1 I,''1• '1• zJ e� L1 - O o Mill �t Mills .Es�E`sea. 00 I •�• �� I I wZ I J I �� � � \ 1 \ ���. 9.g _s��E� I •�• � w 3 � � � \ \\ � 08 �Y 53$ t: •gl I 1�a � � Iia � \ .11l \ s��e�,��;,Z ism 1 'Efg.F w 3 \ T� �'AO� �: �:' '1,1.1 1 ► .\\ ��Q31{ 1 a }1' \�I \ x•'' \\ \\ \ \ 1 1 LLI Elm QJ R91 aLL \ \\ 'ij;: \ �� \ \ \ \ 1' UJ7 z _ J - I � Jig IL Oa q Qwmy��� 0 Ob J Lu J' z\\ W I \ Eis E l I 4E 17 �+ O AN CD Im ro- om E of c' 00 = S, 4m w a N o � m g N O co cc e6 00J c w 1) c E N p 8 nb � a Q Y cc Q NN m MG xm m � N °7 0 � m N U � m E 'a m w c m W V ZU Q t O / J N W � N Q m /�O CL N �+ O AN CD Im ro- om E of c' 00 = S, 4m w a N o � m g N O co cc e6 00J c w 1) c E N p 8 nb � a Q Y cc Q NN m MG xm m � N °7 0 � m N U � m E 'a m w — — 83 .Od � \\ \� \� i \ 111 \,1111\;11` \111 \ � I \ \ I I I 1 1 11111 \\\ uj \ �. I � ``II l i l l 11 ► 1, I V 1 -- �,I �lll;ll►1 `11111 I � I li��'1 II�►1�` � 1111 i I � �►'�I \��1111 1 II I 1 1 1 111111 I , I�� I W;. I 11 I 1nI11111 11111 I .0 I U� 1 I W 0 ,.,I � Wo I � I 114,, i 1`� i r�ali 1IIJ 1 1 1 � I I ► I I L �, 1 1 1 1 1\ � I 1 1 W W O o O I I ,, II 1 �1 \ O � I o- I�` \ \\ \ J I - L� IN 4. I 1� \ 1 o I \ \ 1 I 111 'E o rvi •v V E $ o � ��m c;c_ xy� 8 �- C O co N wGo ■ .o N O Q Y �o � � E N p p � o W Y Y W W � h M G m Km CO ai .I a� U, ti nn 2 4 � as`Jo5E E.a;■mahc e�6§ $ i= •ic�$$ din �'Spy'�� a{ES•\ 6.2:ii§E S 'off e E� 6Jg ° 3fa S� • � —� =s' i o n o vi O u e�csuo off= v b�fE �No e °�• ' b O C • O «$ ywlfv 7 .i N go.$ i S fig ��wfi_"E $S.v p m ov i� o. Q3oF0,1 Eiu'r o Yi ddd fio° 9a�$,t. �qdE� �u a ro c5�c'p iii � Rid„ EE • a `p c a w" � u w g y 01 ••3� 3°SE 02.. ooa� $sem Yyp Bd I1 p G r f L Q jE r O 3 i V � � p'B ps {�� Ga • b j F � E mom., �a� :frjpei0 r�pv S ° JN -Ss �3oo.�EL ii�o zoo" O 1Y Mg fix _ 1. pig fsa3 O �P \ 1 • m $9 O F 09 Nom �ZZ �9$ Wgo 6i 32 w. n = W ON NW h W 1✓<W y�J WO�.• ZO fin•• W WJ2F p< J«<��rC n {Ls1l < >w }} Fi F q v�s_QQ g'nW 1 \ \\\ 9 a m W e, N 8 II LJ o 0 to w� o� \ \\\ 1p \ \ \ `OLOJ)"a SEMACK — • \ \ N01'46 26 W N, 162.15 \ \ . A spa \ p AMLLn 0 \\ r \ 3 � AN��� g N v r 9 2 1' HN w ` 00 N � tj g 10 Z m 11 F O NOS Qi 8 q OQ Rr c d o o w: AUA m $9 O F 09 Nom �ZZ �9$ Wgo 6i 32 w. n = W ON NW h W 1✓<W y�J WO�.• ZO fin•• W WJ2F p< J«<��rC n {Ls1l < >w }} Fi F q v�s_QQ g'nW 1 \ \\\ 9 a m W e, N 8 II LJ o 0 to w� o� \ \\\ 1p \ \ \ `OLOJ)"a SEMACK — • \ \ N01'46 26 W N, 162.15 \ \ . A spa \ p AMLLn 0 \\ r \ 3 � AN��� g N v r 9 2 1' HN Staff Report `�'` VARIANCE VRA D0 C O L O R d D O February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date January 25, 2006 Variance type Parking Code - New Parking Standard for Self Storage Land Use Legal description Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No. 3 Zoning Industrial/Commercial (IC) Address 382 Metcalf Road Introduction The applicant is requesting a Variance from a parking standard for the self -storage use associated with the proposed Tract "Y" development project. The specific request is to reduce the minimum parking standard from 1/800sq.ft. to 1/1300 sq.ft. Staff has advised the applicant that processing a variance application in the absence of a specific regulation is the incorrect process for reasons noted below. First, the applicant is seeking relief from a section of the Municipal Code which does not exist. Self storage is not enumerated within the Offstreet Parking Table in Section 17.24.020C of the Municipal Code; therefore, either the Zoning Administrator must determine the appropriate parking requirement (after recommendation by appropriate Town Departments) or the Municipal Code must be amended to include this specific land use. In the absence of a specific parking ratio for self -storage, staff will initiate a zoning code text amendment to establish a parking standard for self -storage and establish self -storage as a permitted use in the I/C Zone. The result of the zoning amendment may eliminate the applicant's need for a Variance. Secondly, staff believes the applicant has failed to meet the hardship guidelines necessary to recommend approval. The Variance hardship guidelines are the most difficult standards for an applicant to meet and the fact that other Variances have been approved by the Town in the past or on other similar properties does not alone warrant approval of a Variance application. The findings required to grant a Variance are predicated on a specified regulation, which as stated above does not exist. Nonetheless, staff views the request as self-imposed with no rationale for not meeting the 1/800 standard other than approval of similar applications in the Town's history. Staff recommends this item be tabled until a Zoning Code amendment has taken place, and specific parking standards have been added to the Industrial land use designation. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Filing 3, Mountain Star Subdivision, Parking Variance February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 5 a Background The project is comprised of two large buildings that house both self -storage and "I/C Land Uses. According to the Avon Municipal Code, the IC zone district is intended "to provide sites for light industrial and manufacturing uses, wholesale outlets, warehousing, offices and storage facilities." Also allowed in the IC district are showrooms, industrial, construction and wholesale offices. This application is being reviewed in conjunction with a sketch plan application for a mixed-use project which includes a mix of self -storage and Industrial/Commercial land uses. Additionally, a Special Review Use application is being sought for an on-site caretakers unit. History of Tract Y During the planning and approval process of the Mountain Star PUD, the Mountain Star Limited Liability Company initiated a land exchange with the United States Forest Service. This land trade resulted in the acquisition of 619.75 acres of land adjacent to the Mountain Star PUD, including a 7.232 acres site intended for a Town of Avon public works facility to be located along lower Metcalf Road in the midst of the Industrial/Commercial zone district area. This 7.232 acres site is now described as: Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No.3. A PUD Amendment approved by the Town of Avon on April 12, 1994 resulted in the incorporation of 612.56 of the 619.75 acres into the Mountain Star PUD. The PUD Amendment approved zoning for six residential lots, the Ranch Central operation, an equestrian center and 567 acres of dedicated open space. The remaining acreage, a 7.232 -acre parcel, identified as the public works facility site, was specifically excluded from this rezoning action. In 1996, Tract Y remained designated as Open Space, Landscape, and Drainage (OLD) and was re -zoned to Industrial/Commercial ("IC") by the approval of Ordinance 96-11. On September 17,1998 a final design application for Mountain Star Commercial Center was approved, which included 48,240 sq.ft. of office and warehouse space. A building permit was issued on July 6, 1998 and expired on February 17, 2000. The Mountain Star Commercial Center was approved as IC zoning in accordance with the parking requirements set forth in the Avon Municipal Code, Section 17. 24.020. There were no modifications, concessions, or variances from either the 3 parking spaces per/1,000 sq.ft. of office space or 1 parking space per/800 sq.ft. of warehouse space. The buildings were well sited to allow access and turning movements for delivery trucks and provide for adequate drainage. In a letter dated December 22, 1999, Mike Matzko, Zoning Administrator confirmed that a commercial storage facility was consistent with the IC zone district as permitted by Section 17.20.020 B (1), Avon Municipal Code to determine additional uses consistent with IC zoning. On February 14, 2000, Karen Griffith, Town Planner prepared a letter providing parking requirements for uses not specifically enumerated as permitted by Section 17.24.030(7) for self -storage and mixed-use industrial development on Tract Y. The letter does not Town of Avon Community Development Phone (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Filing 3, Mountain Star Subdivision, Parking Variance February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 5 reference any plans for this parking determination and recommended 4 parking spaces for self -storage and 2 parking spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. for mixed-use industrial uses. On June 13, 2003, Mark Donaldson requested Community Development confirm the previous parking determination made by Karen Griffith on February 14, 2000. On June 23, 2003 staff provided a written parking determination on Tract Y, which stated the following: 1 parking space per/1,500 sq.ft. of self -storage or 1 parking space per/every 3 self -storage units. The applicant and staff were unable to reach consensus on this parking determination. On August 4, 2003, the applicant submitted a well-documented request for 1 parking space per 5,000/GFA for self -storage. The supporting documentation included information by a self -storage industry expert, Buzz Victor of United Stor-All. Buzz Victor has developed self -storage in over 12 states; he is the founder of the Self -Service Storage Association, the first self -storage trade association, and has authored books on the self -storage industry. Several meetings took place with the applicant and staff, including the Town Manager, Larry Brooks discussing options and process. The staff was impressed by the proposal presented by the applicant and his expert, Buzz Victor. Staff remained reluctant to make additional parking reductions without requiring a public process and having an application submitted. The following public processes were proposed to address the parking reductions for self -storage: parking variance (similar to the warehouse/storage facilities with parking variances on Mountain Center and Vail/Avon Commercial Park); special review use (which created issues with length and conditions of the approval); and PUD. The applicant did not avail itself to any of the public processes proposed by staff and proceeded to submit a sketch plan application on October 1, 2003. The plans for Wildridge Business Park and Storage Facility were revised and re -submitted on November 18, 2003. The variance application was subsequently approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and later overturned by the Town Council. Variance Criteria According to the Section 17.36.040, the Avon Municipal Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission shall consider the following factors with respect to the requested variance: 1. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity; 2. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or to attain the objectives of this title without grant of special privilege; Town of Avon Community Development Phone (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Filing 3, Mountain Star Subdivision, Parking Variance February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 5 3. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety; 4. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed variance. Findings Required According to Section 17.36.050 of the Avon Municipal Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission shall make the following written findings before granting a variance: A. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; Staff Response: The granting of this variance does constitute a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same district. Although other properties in the same zone district have been granted parking Variances, (Avon Self Storage Lot 25, Block 1, BMBC - Resolution No. 89-10) and the AAA Mini Storage (Lot 14115, Block 1, BMBC), without a specified regulation, staff would require all other I/C properties adhere to the 11800 ratio. B. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties of improvements in the vicinity; Staff Response: Without a developed ordinance, the implications of associated standards are difficult to determine whether they would be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare of other properties. C. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: 1.The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; Staff Response: Staff does not believe there would be a physical hardship for the property owner due to the strict, literal interpretation of the Off Street Parking standards. 2.There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone; Staff Response: While Tract Y is a unique property (i.e. 7+ acres in size with a 2 - acre building envelope), most properties located in the Industrial Commercial District feature steep slopes in excess of 40%, and are generally located at the base of large drainage ways. 3.The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation deprives the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Town of Avon Community Development Phone (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949.5/49 Tract Y, Filing 3, Mountain Star Subdivision, Parking Variance February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 5 Staff Response: While there have been Variances approved by the Planning Commission in the Town's history for other properties in the Industrial/ Commercial land use district, staff believes that these were processed in error. Nonetheless, the degree to which relief is being sought with this application is to a higher degree than past approvals, and the nature and size of this proposal is inconsistent with the two sited Variance approvals above. Furthermore, the finding requires deprivation from a "regulation", and as noted previously the regulation does not exist. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends one of the following motions: 1) Tabling of this application until the time at which new parking standards for the Industrial/Commercial zone district are established. 2) Denial of this Variance through Resolution 06-04 with the following findings: 1. The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in a practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; and 2. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone; and 3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. If you have any questions regarding this or any other project or community development issue, please call me at 748.4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitted, ric Heldemann Senior Planner Exhibits: A - Variance Application Form, resubmitted January 19, 2006 B - Letter from Applicant - Response to Variance Criteria, dated January 25, 2006 C - Resolution No. 06-04, Resolution Denying Variance Request D'- Resolution No. 04-10, Resolution Approving a Parking Variance E - April 27, 2004 Council Meeting Minutes F - Supplement to application dated February 2, 2006. Town of Avon Community Development Phone (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-bf49 W .j VON L VARIANCE APPLICATION i Variance Revieo- Fee: S300.00 Donaldson Architects Mailing Address: PO Box 5300 Phone #: 949-5200 Fax #: Owner of Property: ARI Avon, LLC _Cin: Avon State: CO Zip: 81620 949-5205 Cell #: _ 390-5300 Mailing Address: 4001 Tamiami Trail North, City: Naples State: FL Zi Phone #: (239) 213-1955 Ste. 350 — P 34103 Fax #: (239) 213-194OCell #: Lot: Tract -Y Block: N/A Subdivision: Mountain Star Filing 3 Project Name: Wildridge Business Park Street Address: 0382 Metcalf Road Current Zoning: Industrial/Commercial (I/C) Describe the Variance Requested: Variance from Section 17.24.0 10 Table C: Off Street Parking, Industrial Land Use: For Self Storage Parking From 1/800 G.F.A. to 1/1300 G.F.A A. Describe the relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity.: This request is consistent with all previous variance granted for all self -storage uses in the Town of Avon, as well as with National Industry Standards for this scope of self -storage facilities and services. Commimny Development' P.O. Box 973 Avon. CO 81620 (970)7484030 Fax (970)949-5749 (m. [227/01) Page I of2 x B. Describe the degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specific regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or attain the objectives of Title 1736.040 without grant of special privilege: I parking space per 1,300 s.f. G.F.A. for self -storage uses, including Management Office; and relief for any '--,=-g dock requirements (for self -storage) 17.24.030.6.B.4 C. Describe the effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of Population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety: Due to demonstrated lack of need for any parking spaces beyond this request; only positive efforts are forecasted. We know of no negative effects of the granting of this variance request. D. Any such other factors and criteria as the Planning Commission may deem applicable to the proposed variance: Will minimize site disturbance areas Reduces re -wall requirements and provides a practical solution, in the correct zone district for self -storage operations. "Please review Town of Avon Resolution I (we) t that all information provided to the Town of Avon in connection with this application as true and correct, that I (we) understand the Town of Avon regulations applicable to this project, and understand that incomplete submittals will delay application review. Owner designates Appli- carrt as indicated to act as owner's representative in all application submittals related to this project Applicant: Owner. (Print Name): -� (Print Name): Date: Date: .. Caoa®ity Developm®tLP.O. lrwc 9MENNNEMMA 75 Aveq Lb 81620 (970)748.4030 Fu (970)949-5749 (rev. 17/27/01) Page 2 of 2 Good Morning Matt, January 25, 2006 Matt Pielsticker, Planning Technician Community Development Department Town of Avon Avon, CO Re: Supplemental Information for Tract Y Variance Application 0048 EBEAVER CREEK BLVD SUITE 207 Box 5300' AVON, CO 81620 970.949.5200 . vmda@vmda.com FAX -949.5205 RECEIVED JAN 2 5 2006 Community Thank you for your initial comments regarding our Variance Application. We have prepared and attached additional discussion regarding Variance Criteria Review and Findings Required for your review and consideration. Variance Criteria Review A. "Describe the relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity." The Town of Avon, to the best of our knowledge, has and has only had a total of three locations for significant self -storage facilities. They are: 11ountain Center: Original approval for 25, 000 sf self storage with zero parking requirements; this location has re -opened with the same area of self - storage being utilized, and is currently providing 1 parking space for 800 square feet ofgross self storage area. AAA Mini -Storage: This project has been approved to operate with I parking space per 1,300 sf and is currently operating. Avon Self -Storage: This project was approved and has operated continually with about 7 parking spaces for 44, 000 sf ofgross self -storage space. Based on the foregoing, we suggest that by approving this variance application, it would allow this Self -Storage project to operate in a reasonably similar manner as those same businesses within this same zone district. B. "Describe the degree to which relief from the strict and literal interpretation and enforcement of a specific regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity, or attain the objectives of Title 17.36.040 without grant of special privilege." No change from language stated in Variance Application. C. "Describe the effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety." No negative effect is foreseeable on light and air by granting approval of this variance. This se f storage facility is designed to meet a current local demand for services in and around the Avon, CO area, thereby meeting the population as currently distributed, without changes in infrastructure or unnecessary distances for the traffic and transportation facilities to attain the service proposed. C. "Any such other factors as the Planning Commission may deem applicable to the proposed variance." No change from language stated in Variance Application. 17.36.050 Findings Required "The Planning and Zoning Commission shall make the following written findings before granting a variance: (1) That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the same district; Based on the foregoing noted self -storage facilities in operation in Avon, the granting of this variance will not be a special privilege. (2) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; There is no evidence of detriment to public health, safety or welfare by the granting of this variance. Likewise, the granting of this variance will allow the proposed development to enjoy the similar privileges of reduced parking requirements consistent with industry ranges. (3) That the variance is warranted for one (1) or more of the following reasons: a. No comment applicable. b. No comment applicable. c. "The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district." Bingo! Based on the parking assessment of like business operations in this district, this appears to be precisely the reason for variance being warranted me kVw if you need any further information or have any questions. TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-04 A RESOLUTION DENYING A VARIANCE TO THE PARKING STANDARDS FOR SELF STORAGE ON TRACT Y, MOUNTAIN STAR SUBDIVISION, FILING NO. 3, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, Victor Mark Donaldson, applicant for the Wildridge Business Park, has applied for a variance to the parking standards for self -storage, as described in the application dated January 9, 2006, 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 variance application; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon has considered the following: A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed by the zoning code; and B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the town comprehensive plan; and C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon, Colorado, hereby DENIES a variance to the parking standards for self- F:IPlmuiing & Zoning CnnunissianlResolutinus120o6lRes 06-04 Trac! Y MTST Fit 1Vo.3 Variancedoc storage, as described in the application dated January 9, 2006, as stipulated in Title 17, of the Avon Municipal Code for Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing No. 3, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, based upon the following findings: 1. That the granting of the Variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; and 2. That the granting of the Variance will be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the Variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons; and a. The strict literal, interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title, b. There are not exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the Variance that does not apply generally to other properties in that same zone. c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Adopted this 7th day of February, 2006 Signed: Chris Evans, Chairman Attest: Phil Struve, Secretary Date: Date: F: I planning & Zoning Commie'sio,i I ResohnionA20061Res 06-04 Tract Y MTST Fil NoJ Variance doc TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-10 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PARKING VARIANCE DETERMINATION FOR SELF STORAGE USES ON TRACT Y, MOUNTAIN STAR SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, Victor Mark Donaldson Architects ("VMDA Inc.'), representing ARI of Avon, LLC, has applied for a parking variance in order to create a reduced parking standard for self -storage uses proposed on Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, as described in the application dated October 1, 2004 and design plans dated March 17, 2004 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 Variance application; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon has considered the following: A. The relationship of the requested variance to other existing or potential uses and structures in the vicinity; and B. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcements of a specified regulations is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of this title without grunt of special privilege; and C. The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities, and public safety; and D. Such other factors and criteria as the Commission deems applicable to the proposed Variance. PTIanning! Zoning commisaionUteW1ut1oreU004Utea 0410 TractY NMTR ScIfStorageParking Variance.doc NN TOW, THEREFORE, BE,IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon, Colorado hereby approves a Variance for Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision as described in the application dated October 1, 2003 and design plans dated March 17, 2004 as stipulated in Title 17, of the Avon Municipal Code; and based upon the following findings: 1. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; and 2. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and 3. That the Variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons; and a. The strict literal, interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title, b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the Variance that do not apply generally to other properties in that same zone. c. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. This application is approved with the following conditions: 1. The parking standard is specifically limited to the approval for the Wildridge Business Park (Tract Y) and shall apply to all areas labeled as self storage square footage on plans dated March 17, 2004. Parking dedication will be finally calculated at building permit based on compliance with the design review approval. 2. The parking standard will not be waived in the future should a tenant wish to `convert' self - storage space into another type of Industrial/Commercial land use. A new variance must be applied for at that time, or additional parking created on-site that meets code requirements for "Industrial Land Use". 3. All areas not specifically identified as self -storage shall continue to comply with the required "Industrial Land Use" parking standard of 1 parking space per 800 square feet of Gross Floor Area as indicated on plans dated March 17, 2004. 4. A full electrical plan for all levels labeled as "Self Storage" in both Building One (Basement, Level Three) and Building Two(Level Two, Level Three, Level Four) will be submitted at building permit indicating no rough electrical or electrical outlet(s) to any individual self storage units proposed. Compliance with these conditions must be verified at issuance of final Certificate of Occupancy. 5. No rough plumbing to any of the proposed self -storage units is permitted under the terms of this approval. FAIR ening & Zoning ComrnissionkMolulions�200ARcs 04.10 TractY MTSTR ScltStorageParking Variance.doc tt' 6. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. ADOPTED THIS 6th DAY OF April, 2004 Sign : LZ_�� .1 Date: 4 D 6 Chris Evans, Chair Attest: �/ u-G� Date: SI to �2Oa Terry Smith, Secretary . FAPlanning At Zoning ComminionT- moluti0ns\200ARes 0410 TradY MTSTR SeaStomppad log vsrianm.doe Reynolds opened the public hearing. Kathleen Walsh spoke on behalf of Tamara Underwood (reading her notes) and herself, noting concerns that no commercial should be included in this area, that earlier proposals included park and that this should remain in the project, the questions of why the road dissects the park and whether or not the town will obtain the land lost with the construction of the road, and finally the need to document that there will not be any commercial within the neighborhood zone. Mayor Reynolds noted that the Town of Avon requested that the developer construct Swift Gulch Road all the way through. Councilor Wolfe noted that he preferred that parkland be subdivided and dedicated to the town as soon as possible. Councilor Sipes added that there should be stated intent that no change in zoning would be supported. Some discussion ensued about current zoning allowed on Tract H as commercial. The Town Engineer noted that the land use summary should be consistent with the PUD Plan. Some comments were made regarding the proposed roundabout at that location with regard to grade. Further discussion ensued about the zoning for Tract H with respect to Condition No. 8. All agreed that the language written in the PUD, which states that the Tract H parcel is slated for commercial zoning, were previously approved. Town Engineer Wood further commented on the fact that the planning areas overlap and that the land use summary should reconcile to the PUD Plan. Town Manager Larry Brooks noted that the entitlements for the commercial zoning were already approved. With no further comments, the public hearing was closed. Mayor Pro Tem McDevitt moved to approve Resolution No. 04-15, Series of 2004, A Resolution to approve the Village at Avon, Filing 3, Preliminary Subdivision Application. Councilor D. Buckley seconded the motion and the Resolution passed with a five to one vote (D. Buckley, P. Buckley, Brown, McDevitt, Wolfe — aye; Sipes — nay). New Business Mayor Reynolds noted that interviews for the appointment of new Planning & Zoning Commission Members were conducted at the work session. Councilor Wolfe moved to appoint Chris Evans, Terry Smith, Phil Struve and Tim Savage to the Avon Planning & Zoning Commission. Councilor Brown seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Town Manager Larry Brooks presented the proposed long-term Service Agreement between the Town of Avon and Bachelor Gulch Metropolitan District. He noted several short-term agreements exist for fleet maintenance out of the Swift Gulch Facility. This long term agreement is proposed for 20 years with some extensions as provided for in the agreement. It was noted that a two-thirds vote is required for approval. The Town council will set the rate on an annual basis; the mechanics rate and the rate will not exceed the Town's cost. Brooks noted that working with Paul Jardis of the Metro District has been very positive. He noted that there should be the following changes to the agreement: 1) Article 3, line 7 / typo hourly rate should be $102.61 2) Article 13 (a) line 6, delete "Fire Protection" Mayor Pro Tem McDevitt moved to approve the Service Agreement with Bachelor Gulch with the above referenced changes. Councilor Sipes seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously. Senior Planner Tambi Katieb presented an Appeal of Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution No. 04-10, approving a parking variance for Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Town of Avon. He reviewed the memo to the Council included in the packet and noted that this review would be a public hearing. He noted that on April 6, 2004, the Planning & Zoning Commission approved a variance application for a determination on parking standards for the Tract Y project. The variance was approved through Resolution No. 04-10 and applied only to the portion of this project that is proposed as self -storage use. The remainder of the project is Regular Council Meeting Page 4 of 7 April 27, 2004 parked per the Town Code standards. He noted that T.J. Conners, a noticed property owner and operator of the AAA mini storage and warehouse facility on Metcalf Road, appealed the Commissions' decision to the Town Council. He then reviewed the findings and staff report for the P&Z Commission and other materials included in the council packet. He noted that the Resolution approved by P&Z included several conditions as well. In researching a standard for number of parking spaces for storage complexes, there was nothing provided from numerous sources that "standards" exists. Town Attorney John Dunn reviewed the procedure for the appeal of variances per the Town Code (Title 17) outlining the three types of motions that might occur with this review, i.e. confirm P&Z decision based on the findings, reverse P&Z decision and deny variance and specifically outline reasons for disapproval, or modify P&Z decision. The Council was directed to consider the decision made by P&Z based on the criteria presented and then submit their own decision about the application. He again noted that this was a public hearing, and that the appellate will address the council first followed by the applicant. Neil Movitz, the attorney representing the Vail/Avon Commercial Park Condominium Association including TJ Connors and owner of one of the businesses within this commercial park, presented an appeal to the decision primarily due to the public safety issues this project would create on Metcalf Road, in essence increasing more traffic issues. He spent some time addressing the case studies presented in the application, access to the project, and the criteria used to assess the variance. Paul Benicoff, also a business owner in the commercial park, spoke about his concerns with the project, primarily safety as related to traffic. Mark Donaldson, Victor Mark Donaldson Architects, addressed the Council at this time, presenting the application and making some clarifications with regard to the type user of this particular type of "self-storage" project. He noted that access to the units is via an elevator. He noted that his client Chad Lund, with Lund Capital Group was present as well. He spent some time addressing the criteria used in the application review, including a detailed review of the case studies presented. Council reviewed the plans with regard to the deceleration lane & the parking lot configuration. Donaldson explained the case study review and how the analysis was made. Chris Juergens, with VMDA, also presented details on the statistics. An estimate was made on the area required for parking if the variance were not granted. Donaldson outlined the number of months & public process that this project has seen, and commented on the "Findings" made with regard to the project. Some discussion ensued about the number of parking spaces required for the entire site and the number or parking as related to the self- storage vs. the industrial—commercial use on the site. It was also confirmed that retail was not allowable in this location. TJ Connors, owner of AAA Mini-Storage, addressed the Council with comments regarding the history and facts of his project, statistics related to storage units, concerns with grading of the driveways, traffic impacts from the project, and proposed standards presented regarding parking. Chad Lund, with Lund Capital Group, made some comments about his company and his experience with these types of storage unit projects. Mayor Reynolds opened the public hearing, comments were made from one Wildridge resident (unable to hear name) who expressed concern with traffic on Wildridge / Metcalf Road. The public hearing was closed. Some of Council's comments are as follows: • Not supportive of project due to traffic impacts • Not supportive of the reasons described with the criteria • Concerned with traffic impacts but not the parking variance • Appreciated that application included deceleration & turnaround lanes • Not supportive of the variance because it really allows for more parking on the site ■ Metcalf Road needs attention Regular Council Meeting Page 5 of 7 April 27, 2004 Councilor Wolfe moved to uphold the appeal that was made after significant deliberation based on the documentation provided by staff, the applicant, public comment and the review of the requirements of Section 17.36.050, and that we overturn the Planning & Zoning recommendation that was adopted in Resolution No. 04-10 and on the specific basis of the following: a, that the granting of the variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; b. and that the granting of the variance will be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties of improvements in the vicinity c. and that the variance is not warranted on the basis of any of the three reasons as follows: 1. the strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title' 2. there is no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone; 3. the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation does not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Further discussion ensued about other variances that have been granted to storage facilities. Councilor P. Buckley seconded the motion and it passed with a four to three vote (P. Buckley, Wolfe, Reynolds, Sipes — yea; Brown, D. Buckley, McDevitt — nay). Consent Agenda Mayor Reynolds asked for a motion on the Consent Agenda. Councilor D. Buckley moved to adopt the consent agenda. Councilor Brown seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. a. Approval of the April 13, 2004 Regular Council Meeting Minutes b. Western Enterprise, Inc. Contract c. CJ Chenier Band Contract d. Resolution No. 04-12, A Resolution approving the Final Plat, A Resubdivision of Lot 11, Block 1 Eaglebend Subdivision, Filing 1, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado (4500 W & 4500 E Eaglebend Drive) Regular Council Meeting Page 6 of 7 April 27, 2004 There being no further business to come before the Council, the meeting adjourned at 9:35 PM. APPROVED: Michael Brown Debbie Buckley Peter Buckley Mac McDevitt Buz Reynolds Brian Sipes Ron Wolfe Page 7 of 7 Regular Council Meeting April 27, 2004 Matt, February 2, 2006 Matt Pielsticker, Planning Technician Community Development Department Town of Avon Avon, CO Hand delivered by VMDA, Re: Supplemental Information in support of Tract Y Variance Application 0048 EBEAVER [REEK BLVD SUITE 207 Box 5300 AVON, CO 81620 970.949.5200 vmda@vmda.com FAX -949.5205 RECEIVED FEB 0 2 2006 Community Development Consistent with our discussions this morning, we respectfully submit the following text in support of the application noted above. Thank you for all your assistance and direction in planning for success in this matter. We maintain that the necessary single finding for thea b and c. options of paragraph (3) 17.36.080 Findings Required for warranting the variance is logically item (c), as written in our previous letter. It is however very important that our reasoning be understood in requesting this variance and to that end we submit further discussion on items a. and b., as follows. The following text for paragraphs a. and b. should be considered a part of our letter to you dated January 25, 2006, page two, 17.36.050 Finding Required: a. Replace No comment applicable with the following language: "The property has practical difficulties to consider; specifically there exists a major drainage and debris flow consideration in concert with a prevalence of steep slopes and a carefully worded plat note restricting specific development components to be contained within a specified 2 -acre envelope that create significant considerations and inherent limitation to the development of this property." "A Ac fully worded plat note restricting specific development components to be ned within a specified 2 -acre envelope that create significant considerations and nt limitation to the development of this property." submitted, Mark Donaldson Staff Report ATRN SPECIAL REVIEW USEC0 U February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date January 31, 2006 Project type Special Review Use (SRU) Permit Legal description Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing 3 Zoning Industrial/Commercial Address 238 Metcalf Road Introduction Victor Mark Donaldson Architects is requesting a Special Review Use permit for the inclusion of a caretaker unit in a proposed self storage and Industrial/Commercial business park on Metcalf Road. The project is being referred to as "Wildridge Business Park" and is located within the Industrial/Commercial zone district. The Avon Municipal Code permits up to four (4) residential units per lot in conjunction with business operation in the IC zone district if approved by a Special Review Use permit. The caretaker unit would be located on the second level of Building Two, on the northeastern corner of the building. The unit would be a two bedroom, two bathroom unit measuring approximately 1,400 square feet. It is important to note that a Special Review Use permit was issued in 2004 for a caretaker unit on the same property, in the same location. The applicant has chosen to reapply for the same permit approval. A copy of the previous approval (Resolution 04-09) is attached for your review. Criteria for Review According to section 17.48.040 of the Avon Municipal Code, the Planning & Zoning Commission shall consider the following criteria when evaluating an application for a Special Review Use permit: 1. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements Imposed by the zoning code. This use appears to comply with all other requirements of the Zoning Code and proposes two parking spaces. 2. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive Plan. Town of Avon Community Development (970)949-4280 Fax (970) 949.5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing No. 3, Special Review Use Permit - Caretaker Unit February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 3 There are goals and policies that can be applied to this application. The policies and goals in the Comprehensive Plan set the vision for the Town and provide a direction from which all planning decisions are made. Policy A1.5 states, 'The Community will include a wide range of residential uses including.... vertically integrated residential (housing on the upper floors of commercial buildings)." This application appears to comply with Policy C1.4, which encourages "innovative designs that contribute to the quality and diversity of the housing stock." Goal. C2 states, "Provide affordable housing for permanent and seasonal residents that is attractive, safe and integrated with the community." 3. Whether the proposed use Is compatible with adjacent uses. Such compatibility may be expressed In appearance, architectural scale and features, site design and the control of any adverse Impacts including noise, dust, odor, lighting, traffic, safety, etc. No changes to the building's appearance or architecture are required to accommodate this on-site caretaker's unit. The unit would be located on the second floor of Building 2, which is a floor composed entirely of Self Storage land use. No adverse impacts are anticipated. In staff's opinion, a caretakers/managers unit provides a logical and efficient on-site management solution that would result in a more controlled project operation. 4. That the granting of the special review use requested provides evidence of substantial compliance with the public purpose provisions, as outlined in Section 17.28.085 of the Avon Municipal Code: A. The application demonstrates a public purpose which the current zoning entitlements cannot achieve. The inclusion of up to four caretaker units is permitted with a Special Review Use Permit. Staff is in support of on site residential land uses within this zone district. B. Approval of the zoning application provides long term economic, cultural or social community benefits that are equal to or greater than potential adverse Impacts as a result of the changed zoning rights. There are no anticipated 'adverse impacts' with this zoning request. C. The flexibility afforded In approval of the zoning application will result In better siting of the development, preserving valued environmental and cultural resources, and increasing the amount of public benefit consistent with the community master plan documents. As stated, allowing an on-site manager for this property is consistent with the current and draft update of the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949.5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing No. 3, Special Review Use Permit - Caretaker Unit February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 3 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 06-03, thereby approving this Special Review Use application. Recommended Motion "I move to approve Resolution 06-03 to include a caretaker unit on Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing No. 3." A copy of the complete SRU application is available for review during normal business hours in the office of Community Development. If you have any questions regarding this or any other project or community development issue, please call me at 748-4030, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectfully submitt Matt Pielsticker Planner I Att: Application Form Resolution 04-09 Resolution 06-03 Written supplement to application, dated January 19, 2006 Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 AVO N C O L O R A D O SPECIAL REVIEW USE Special Review Use Fees: Residential S170.00 Non - Residential S300.00 Applicant: Victor Mark Donaldson Architects Mailing Address: PO Box 5300 Phone #: 949-5200 Fax #: Owner of Property: ARI Avon, LLC City: Avon State: CO Zip:81620 949-5205 Cell #: 390-5300 Mailing Address:4001 Tamiami Trail N., Ste. 350City: Naples State: FL Zi Phone #: (239)213-1955 P 34103 Fa: #: (239) 213-1940 Cell #: N/A Project Name: wildridge Business Park Street Address: 0382 Metcalf Road Lot: Tract -Y Block: N/A Subdivision: Mountain Star Filing #3 Zoning Classification: Industrial/Commercial (I/C) Type of Special Review Use Requested (Please be specific): residential unit for use as "on-site" manager residence — 2 bedroom 2 bathroom 1.300 s.f. (See Review Criteria: A. Does the proposed use otherwise comply with all requirements imposed by the zoning code: Yes. Communin Development. P.O. Box 975 Avon. CO 81620 (970)748-4030 Far (970)949.5749 (rev. 1127/01) Page 1 of 2 B. Does the proposed use conform to the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan- Yes. C. Is the proposed use compatible with adjacent uses: Yes. (No dogs will be allowed) 1 (we) represent that all information provided to the Town of Avon in connection with this application as true and correct. that 1 (we) understand the Town of Avon regulations applicable to this project. and understand that incomplete submittals will delay application review. Owner designates Appli- cant as indicated to act as owner's representative in all application submittals related to this project. Applicant Owner: (Print Name): Date: (Print Name): Date: Community Development, P.O. Box 975 Avon. CO 81620 (970)748-4030 Fax (970)949.5749 (rev. 12:7/01) Page 2 o2f TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 04-09 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL REVIEW USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A CARETAKER UNIT ON TRACT Y, MOUNTAIN STAR SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, Victor Mark Donaldson, applicant for the Wildridge Business Park and Warehouse Facility, has applied for a special review use permit for a caretaker unit, as described in the application dated March 17, 2004, 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 Special Review Use permit application; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon has considered the following: A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed by the zoning code; and B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the town comprehensive plan; and C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses. Nl OW, THEREFORE, BE TT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon, Colorado, hereby approves a Special Review Use permit for a caretaker unit, as described in the application dated March 17, 2004, as stipulated in Title 17, of the Avon Municipal Code for Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, based upon the following findings: 1. That the proposed use conforms to the requirements as imposed by the Town Zoning Code. 2. That the proposed use conforms to the Town Comprehensive Planparticularly with respect to Policy A1.5 (integrated residential housing) and Goal C2 (affordable housing provision). 3. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses as planned and approved through the design review process. Approved with the following conditions: 1. The caretaker unit will be parked with a minimum of two (2) reserved spaces. 2. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. Adopted this 6th day ojApril, 2004 e Date: d Ob Chris Evans, Chairman Attest. Date: 4 Z00 Terry Smith, S ary FAPluning & Zoning Commiuion\Rcsolutions\2004Uks 04.09 Tract Y MTSTC=takerAprv.doe TOWN OF AVON PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-03 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL REVIEW USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A CARETAKER UNIT ON TRACT Y, MOUNTAIN STAR SUBDIVISION, FILING NO. 3, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO WHEREAS, Victor Mark Donaldson, applicant for the Wildridge Business Park, has applied for a special review use permit for a caretaker unit, as described in the application dated January 9, 2006, 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 Special Review Use permit application; and WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon has considered the following: A. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed by the zoning code; and B. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the town comprehensive plan; and C. Whether the proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses. FAPtanning & Zoning CommissionVtesolutions\2006Vtes 06-03 Tract YMTST Fit No.3 Caretaker Approvat tim NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon, Colorado, hereby approves a Special Review Use permit for a caretaker unit, as described in the application dated January 9, 2006, as stipulated in Title 17, of the Avon Municipal Code for Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing No. 3, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado, based upon the following findings: 1. That the proposed use conforms to the requirements as imposed by the Town Zoning Code. 2. That the proposed use conforms to the Town Comprehensive Plan, particularly with respect to Policy A1.5 (integrated residential housing) and Goal C2 (affordable housing provision). 3. The proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses as planned and approved through the design review process. Approved with the following conditions: 1. The caretaker unit will be parked with a minimum of two (2) reserved spaces. 2. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material representations made by the applicant or applicant representative(s) in this application and in public hearing(s) shall be adhered to and considered binding conditions of approval. Adopted this 7th day of February, 2006 Signed: Date: Chris Evans, Chairman Attest: Date: Phil Struve, Secretary FAPlanning & Zoning Commission\Reso1udons\2006Vies 06-03 Tract YMTST Fit No3 Caretaker ApprovaLdoc Matt, ON January 19, 2006 Matt Pielsticker, Planning Technician Community Development Department Avon, Colorado 81620 Hand Delivered Re: Special Review Use Application for Tract Y Development Proposal Avon, Colorado 0048 EBEAVER CREEK BLVD SUITE 207 Box 5300 AVON. CO 81620 970.949.5200 vmda9vmda.com FA x•949. 5205 As requested in your letter dated January 19, 2006 the following is provided as a written response to Item 1. The granting of the "SRU" for this project provides substantial compliance with the public purpose provision provisions of the Zoning Code as specified in Section 17.28.085, as further noted herein. Pursuant to Section 17.28.085 the Town should consider the following public benefit when evaluating the Application: (1) The application demonstrates a public purpose which the current zoning entitlements cannot achieve. The subject Lot is Zoned Industrial/Commercial, which allows a Residential Use only by Special Review Use. This residential Use will provide on-site and in - town housing for the operations manager; this is tantamount to a non -deed restricted employee housing unit and still cannot be sold separately in the marketplace. (2) Approval of the zoning application provides long term economic, cultural or social community benefits that are equal to or greater than potential adverse impacts as a result of the changed zoning rights. We envision no adverse effects to the approval of this single Residential Unit, designed and integrated gracefully into this development. This residence will provide added security to the site and various operations as well as providing housing for the Employee/Manager. Dogs and household pets are to be prohibited, to the benefit of surrounding wildlife habitat and migration areas, to and from calving areas. Inasmuch as a Residential Unit is listed as a SRU in the IC Zone district, the implementation of this application is consistent with the intent of the Zone district. It is our opinion that the effects of having this residence on site, the community benefits are greater than or equal to any perceived adverse effect. Two parking spaces are provided for this SRU, as set forth in Table 17-C of Title 17. (3) The flexibility afforded in the approval of the zoning application will result in a better siting of the development, preserving valued environmental and cultural resources and increasing the amount ofpublic benefit consistent with the community master plan documents. The SRU neither effects the siting of the development nor has impacts upon the preservation of environmental and cultural resources. The public benefit of this residence would be considered consistent with the community master plan documents which state that one of the Metcalf Road district planning principles include: "Accommodate limited accessory residential development that supports primary industrial / employment land uses. " The granting of this SRU is in substantial compliance section 17.28.085. Respectfully, %Yw Chris Juerge VMDA ,� Sketch Design Plan February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Report date January 31, 2006 Project type Industrial Commercial & Self Storage Legal description Tract Y, Mountain Star Subdivision, Filing 3 Zoning Industrial/Commercial (IC) Address 0382 Metcalf Road Introduction The applicant, Victor Mark Donaldson, is proposing a Sketch Design application for a mixed use project on Metcalf Road which includes a mix of self storage and "Industrial/Commercial" land uses. In conjunction with this application the applicant is seeking a Variance from the Town's "Industrial" parking standard for the self -storage portion of the project, and a Special Review Use application for an on site caretakers unit. Access to the site is provided with a deceleration lane and a perpendicular 24' wide drive with a 20' concrete apron able to accommodate a WB -67 trailer truck. Extensive block retaining walls are required with the proposed site layout in order to retain cut slopes and fill areas. The project is comprised of two large (four level) buildings that house vertically integrated self -storage and "I/C Land Uses." Building One is parallel to Metcalf Road and contains "I/C Land Use" on the middle two floors and self storage in the basement floor and upper floor. Building Two is along the toe of the slope behind and parallel to Building One. This building is architecturally identical to Building One and houses I/C Land Uses on the first floor with a large loading dock and manager's office. Floors two through four house self storage land uses, with the exception of the 1,400 square foot caretaker unit on second level. The buildings are comprised mainly of precast concrete panels, with EFIS accents around windows, metal deck roofing, precast concrete columns, and metal roller doors. Design History On September 17,1998 a final design application for Mountain Star Commercial Center was approved, which included 48,240 sq.ft. of office and warehouse space. A building permit was issued on July 6, 1998 for this project and expired (after extensions) on February 17, 2000. The Mountain Star Commercial Center Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No. 3 + February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 6 was approved as IC zoning in accordance with the parking requirements set forth in the Avon Municipal Code, Section 17. 24.020. There were no modifications, concessions, or variances from either the 3 parking spaces per/1,000 sq.ft. of office space or 1 parking space per/800 sq.ft. of warehouse space. Victor Mark Donaldson later submitted a sketch plan application for a business and storage facility consisting of 141,130 sq.ft. located on Tract Y referred to as the "Wildridge Business Park & Storage Facility" in an application dated October 1, 2003 and plans dated November 18, 2003. Those plans featured three (3) buildings including 88,065 sq. ft. of "self-storage/warehouse" uses on the upper floors and 53,065 sq.ft. of office space on the ground floors. That application was heard at the Commission's January 6, 2004 meeting where concerns regarding the inclusion of one building in particular were noted to the applicant, along with the need to apply for a Variance that specifically tied the reduced parking standards for self -storage to the use. The applicant tabled that application and submitted a revised application dated March 17, 2004 that was reviewed at the Commission's April 6, 2004 meeting. The highlights of the revised application included: ■ Deletion of the third building which included self -storage and industrial/commercial space. • Reduction of total gross floor area from 141,130 square feet to 131,630 square feet. ■ Submittal of a variance application which specifically requested a determination of parking standards for self -storage to be applied to the project. Accompanying that application was a Special Review Use application for the inclusion of a caretaker unit. As determined by staff and the Planning Commission, the applicant submitted a variance application for a determination of a parking standard exclusively for the self -storage use portion of the project. The Variance proposed a requirement of 1 parking space per 5,000 square feet of gross floor area for self -storage area, and included a package of case study research as submitted by the applicant from Buz Victor, a parking expert. That Sketch Plan application, Special Review Use application, and Variance application were approved at the Commission's April 6, 2004 meeting. The Planning and Zoning Commission's Variance approval for Tract Y was appealed by T.J. Conners, the adjacent property owner of AAA Mini Storage. At their April 27, 2004 meeting, the Town Council reversed the decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission (Resolution No. 04-10). The current applications were submitted to the Town on January 9, 2006 and are of similar content. The Special Review Use application is identical to the previous submittal. The Variance application proposes 1 parking space/ per 1,300 sq. ft. of Self Storage. This current sketch application also proposes two buildings, with a total gross floor area reduced to 119,860 gross sq. ft., and total on-site parking increased from 78 to 120 spaces. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No. 3 February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 6 Site Characteristics The property totals 7.232 acres and is situated at the base of a rather large drainage basin. The site is currently covered in native vegetation and there are two different jeep trails that exist on the property. It is important to note that approximately 54.8% of the site is in excess of 40% slope, which leaves 45% of the site defined as "buildable area" per the Avon Municipal Code. The property is bordered on the north, south, and east by Tract BB, an Open Space parcel that was platted at the same time as Tract Y. Additionally, the property is fronted by the Metcalf Road Right -of -Way to the west. According to the subdivision plat for Tract Y (Final Plat, Mountain Star Subdivision Filing No. 3) development within Tract Y is subject to a two (2) acre Building Envelope. This envelope is unique to the site and is "to be identified by the property owner and reviewed by the Town in conjunction with the Design Review process." Further, "All buildings, portions of buildings, building projections and roof overhangs, structural retaining walls supporting buildings, and parking shall be located completely within the defined building envelope. The access drive, landscape improvements, grading and retaining walls related to access improvements or landscape improvements, utilities, and normal and necessary management of natural vegetation shall be allowed to occur outside of the building envelope." There is some disagreement between staff and the property owner as to what improvements shall be encompassed within this 2 acre building envelope. Included in your packet are two pages submitted by the applicant reflecting 1) Sheet AS1.2- the owner's interpretation of the envelope, and 2) Sheet AS1.1- the Town's interpretation of the envelope in January of 2004. Staff would interpret the envelope requirement to include all retaining walls not associated with the access (i.e. walls wrapping around the southwest corner of the parking lot adjacent to Building 1, the areas between these same walls and the parking lot, the island between buildings 1 and 2, etc). Site Layout & Development The amount of site disturbance proposed for this design submittal not only maximizes (and possibly exceeds as discussed above) the platted building envelope restrictions, but obviously maximizes the property in terms of massing and, as a result, required cut and fill and retainage. The Industrial and Commercial Design Guidelines contain minimum requirements relating to site layout, access, building location, grading and drainage. The Guidelines require that site improvements and access compliment the existing topography of the site. Further, "excessive grading and/or the use of engineer - designed retaining walls are discouraged when an alternate site layout would minimize such disturbances." Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748.4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No. 3 February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 6 Staff recommends that the Commission reviews and determines whether or not the site layout and building locations compliment the natural topography of the site or whether there is a more appropriate design solution for this property. As evidenced by Sheet C1.2 significant portions of Building 2 are located in slopes in excess of 40%, as well as small portions of Building 1. The linear orientation of these buildings does not appear to be the only design solution that minimizes disturbances, and it clearly requires significant grading and retainage. Access to the site is provided with a deceleration turn lane that can also accommodate truck movements and gentle grade (all less than 5% slopes) for the initial ascent up and onto the parking areas. The proposed access requires a large amount of retainage to function with up to 27' of retaining walls (three tiers of 9' block walls) at the worst case. While access options are limited for this property, less retainage would be required if the access drive were further south and largely avoid the 40% slopes. That said, the applicant has designed the access -as requested by staff- to accommodate a WB -67 truck turning movement- a benefit of this property over almost all others located in the zone district. The balance of design and massing issues should be weighed against the functional access that is being provided to the site. There are 120 surface parking spaces provided with this site layout. All of the spaces meet the Town's size requirement of 9' x 18' for surface parking. Maneuverability in and out of some of the parking spaces appears to be difficult with tight turnaround areas near the perimeter of the parking areas. The Guidelines and Municipal Code require parking areas to include landscaping to help screen surface parking. The plans show limited areas to place landscaping in order to screen the surface parking with the proposed site layout. According to the Guidelines, "site grading should be minimized, and only done as necessary for building improvements," and "site improvements should be designed to conform to existing site topography to minimize required grading." Staff finds that the extent of cut and fill required for this design plan to function conflicts with these adopted Town guidelines, however acknowledging that the property is restricted to a 2 -acre building envelope. A preliminary grading and drainage plan (Sheet C5.1) is included in the plan set and it includes a number of different erosion and storm water management techniques. Although it appears that drainage can be managed with the proposed measures, a full drainage report would be required at final. Building Design The architecture and use of materials appear to generally conform to the Design Guidelines. The Guidelines place emphasis on Commercial building design to be prioritized with the primary importance being placed on the first two floors, or the "base area," and secondary emphasis to be placed on the top floor or "roof form." The Guidelines state that buildings should be designed as a composition of architectural elements rather than larger single 'blocks' that appear unrelated. Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fa (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No. 3 February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 6 Staff finds the buildings, independent of their orientation or placement on the site, generally comply with the Design Guidelines. Interest has been added at the ground levels with small columns and covered arcades. Upper levels have a different emphasis paid to window bumpouts and material changes. There are projections which would intrude upon the 48 foot height allowance (on Building 1). The Guidelines allow for 'architectural projections' such as flues, cupolas, towers, and other elements that add character and variety to the project. The Commission should determine if the presented projections which reach in some areas up to 8 feet above the allowable height requirement would be acceptable. Perhaps the larger question which staff has been struggling with is whether the buildings' relationship to the site is acceptable or in compliance with the Design Guidelines and the restrictive 2 -acre building envelope. We would recommend the Commission focus the sketch review on the scale and context of these buildings to the property itself. Discussion The design of this project must be reviewed by the Town of Avon Residential. Commercial. and Industrial Design Review Guidelines. While these Guidelines are the basis for design review, staff believes a larger emphasis should be placed on the perceived 'maxing out' of the site and the allowed 2 -acre envelope. Staff has trouble understanding the relationship of the buildings to the site. Specifically, the orientation and massing of the buildings on the site gives the impression of an overdeveloped site which may not completely recognize the constraints of the existing topography. How parking relates to design review is perhaps the larger question to be explored with this design proposal. Above and beyond the site plan and disturbance issues raised, the land use flexibility that has been afforded to properties in the Industrial/Commercial district has proven problematic to the Town. This zone district has a narrow list of allowed uses including: (1) Warehouses; (2) Laboratories; (3) Electrical substations; (4) Light manufacturing plants; (5) Wholesale sales outlets; (6) Showrooms; (7) Industrial, construction and wholesale offices. While all of the above -listed uses are uses by right in this zone district the problem arises, for example, when more office oriented or other uses that require more parking end up occupying these buildings ultimately placing a different Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Tract Y, Mountain Star Filing No. 3 February 7, 2006 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 6 of 6 parking demand on a project. Within the "Industrial' land use category of the Off Street Parking Standards (Section 17.24.020) there are only a handful of listed uses which are permitted to be parked at the 1/800 sq.ft. requirement. This project includes approximately 37,800 GFA of space called out as "I/C". These areas are parked at the 1/800 sq. ft requirement from the Off Street Parking Table (that only includes "Manufacturing plants, warehousing, wholesaling establishments, and freight terminals"), however, staff feels there should be further detail added to these design review plans prior final design and would recommend an analysis and inclusion by the applicant of a fixed percentage of office space they wish to include in this project that is so parked so as to avoid the types of parking issues that have plagued other mixed use projects in this zone district. Finally, a significant portion of the project (self storage) requires resolution and approval of either the accompanying variance application or the staff initiated amendment to the Town Code to create a self storage parking standard. Based on the outcome of either of these processes, the surface parking may require slight adjustment on the site plans. Design Review Considerations The Commission will take no formal action on this sketch plan application. This design review process is intended to allow both staff and the Commission to give the applicant as much front end direction and feedback on the design to incorporate into a final design application. Staff will provide full plan sets for you to provide written comments and guidance to the applicant at your February 7, 2006 meeting. The Commission and Staff 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_ Cnmmnrcial nr,ri If you have any questions regarding this project or any planning matter, please call me directly at 748-4413, or stop by the Community Development Department. Respectf submitted, Matt Piels ' r Planner Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748-4030 Fax (970) 949-5749 Z Ji F- N W QOM Q = OQ0U- 1: W W< '3-,z O O�Q� D (L ZZOa 4 < O VVV v N Q z � L r- r- O 4 a->Wty 0 -1 Z O U) U) G O U 0 Z z O N O �Z/J V Z Z Z LL Z O Q LL O Z O W LW I..L. Z U LU U) W O L v Q < W SOCA Q vu)J ZN 1: x 1z zw CD Z (3(3 0) 0 OMO 00"0100 'NOAV A 1OV81 'E 'ON CHILI NVIS NI`d1Nf10W ASW MON DOOM M 30`ddS 1NVN31 IVIG I3WW00 / iviNisnGN1 V 30"01S 1N3WdO13A3a AiIV3N -101 / dnoNo IVAdVO GNm LL LL m �Rr Q L9 Q 9 ?gLL a v z W W z v W z W Qat rj O Gi z 4 p W ~ 1-2LLI z v Z ujW O Q (N< Z N c) Q o3 p O J IS F O O Q Q LL Q < W K O Q w v U Q 0000 i z Q Qr(3r-O LU W iU)'cj Q�bdrT Q � � ozTT Q U Omz�6 as � � Q >dQW,U, v Nis QaU U Ji F- N W QOM Q = OQ0U- 1: W W< '3-,z O O�Q� D (L ZZOa 4 < O VVV v N Q z � L r- r- O 4 a->Wty 0 -1 Z O U) U) G O U 0 Z z O N O �Z/J V Z Z Z LL Z O Q LL O Z O W LW I..L. Z U LU U) W O L v Q < W SOCA Q vu)J ZN 1: x 1z zw CD Z (3(3 0) 0 OMO 00"0100 'NOAV A 1OV81 'E 'ON CHILI NVIS NI`d1Nf10W ASW MON DOOM M 30`ddS 1NVN31 IVIG I3WW00 / iviNisnGN1 V 30"01S 1N3WdO13A3a AiIV3N -101 / dnoNo IVAdVO GNm LL LL m �Rr Q L9 Q 9 ?gLL 11 H zJJ 'fl-HUP011 lal B a Q p O Gi 4 1-2LLI Q 11 H zJJ 'fl-HUP011 lal B - ♦a f v. #f/�V Y'la/r Y01•i114.!'N6�.tNi� OC lei®L99l.VX IQY1'MMi:.'. ,� , " .. �iwurxm'wn�a.mau+wm:rv,seiimio�ao.mao. xxw . SOO ;19II3NJ3HD DOH.:A8 NMVMO� u0 39rd OL£ N008 G--1311.. LL) 'moi tJOIN m 3Nn JIM7d0ad WK WKjM' W, DNIad 419 3H1 JO .. .. .. . Dww 3DUY1S10 aw ows 431071010.7 sVt 1S3iA Zy 3mM UUV$ 5 dIHSNM01 Z 'NOLL03S dVW= sNosu�a 31v0 37N. aII /, /J/ obi b �x s3 ► art tit`' ds iI b Z S Mot / � / Z b '6�g�f 3yp, ��y �fy gs O 'd � E56b ' x /a•Y'.. -'.1 / / J L..:1L - _- ,_#_;w,y;' _ -_---1..- -f-_ a.__ 77 T� i' Jr / ` ;/!. l%J°791, /�i-1. % :d, i J•'?t j: 7 ' i I � t Ji , / / i' ,/! // , �.�..I, i,1, / � p i /,JJ,/ i� h./ /.0 jl' r l � J ,•/ i l r ,,'/ � �t i,! 'I. I. 1 I j�i X/1 1, � %.�';,,;�'• � ,� �,, ,;: ,�' I. k _I 1 ! �J/ , _/I �/ /iii//�/� / / ��!/ �1:� �'Jri ' �� '1 •\ ' i t ,11}'1 I ', !--7at.-/\ �`it ,.1If t , it .�, - i�' j � i .,,1 ' i � / ! :/ /. � � �/'i'-l�`� �'�.. \ \\'\\\\ X4'1 \ ao t i �' + �,,.•1 JJ � m ,.,, : It r '� \ \ �--•///� r r �'•�^ '` \ � \ �\\. �l\;\�l It :. `.�{/.1 I ` R ' f ' I .- `//!! 'iJ//' r /i /j \- -,\ •\i\l "\�,\111\1\ `\\\ ,1`\ s- \ \l 1\ifI 1'` 1 1 \` l,� � 1 l�\\`•, � I �b •\ < \ I \' t � '\�� ,`;1`1•\ � `1 � i `,`, ,\\ � ( I i 1 / I j i,'ll i %�lr �j�1 J/ r� �� � 1 \ � \,�,` 1 •,, 1 \'1 ,\1\�, \\ � ` >� I, I i 111 - g � i / J)) /�I %. / \\I•.1'.`\,',, �`, I'•\I ' \1\1 1 \1� 0 M. • } \1 1 ' I t � I '• / / 1: /.lr � ;�/ /%�i �' \ l ;, �1� ,`� +}'`'�1` \ \ \ l \`1l i i .. t 10 i. � `i 11 `\ '`` .\ J / ilil r r Jl. �� '.1�1\.i', ��;t•``,� 1�, 1111 i;I' ' I1 1 1� i',: I � 1 1 \ \\\\ \ } 1�' i' 'i //��; � % �)i. ,'/ �i f, ��`\l 11\, \it 11, ,1111 �Il I' � i \' � •\ ` j l / I1 i .\ .\ \ ,,\ � g � v ,'//,, /.i1 �i /�J�//: �°// ��rl/J. `'� 11 ,• t� 1 l i �' I' �� ) � � 411,'` ``` I' �1 i I •., •I, ' � -- �', � � �\ � , ; � ; J is J/ / �,, � l I .�. �' I I � , � ill I I\ � � •� �II \:\\�\\\ \ \\. ,,•1 ;',t�'1, � ( /J! /,// %// /J/,%/� ':ii jf�';i�� � l��Pl,.�t j� 111! - It\ �•{� i t' '.I \� o , t \ �; � J �, ;L•', ,l,,;�- \i +I•i Pj 1 I II ; l \ \ '.i � \ ( !.'•/ -/�il��//i�� /// � 11 fll, I,I ,i �. I P>jj+l� '�11' \ 1 � 1, \ 1 ; t l l i { 1/�JJ /�i�, '� � "'t l ; i � i $I � ; 111 i � i I \ •? \,- t - is till l�I ;l' \(�, )lr. (�► (li" ll ii 11 '(I1�1 \ ` :,'. l !l1\\'\1 ,.,/>J<�`�? i \ 1\,;t \�\'a',�l 1��1 '11� 11 t,• �,��\ %/�%'%1•'}11 ,}1';�I' l't'�`',jl il�{I1${�II i \, `\ I ? / �: ..'C" i� I , ! ``�` '\.} �, I { 1 I(' i i I I 11 I ,' 1 , ''1 t 1 l \ l 1 �� i 1� t� 1'1 •'' i 1. 1 1,'\ 1\ \ ` `'`'• " VA'V\ IV, ..... ..... \'A 14 i ; aswpiiPwi'liwlowwAwiz .:: Myfpir0wanln:xl�anuco•e.►�• ,` �I 7 O O O O N O l.f! O r— Z o w p ak N Lc'� � � F Lu O 2 �U u IIIIIIIIIIIIII Q OZ96S 0(1"0100 `NOAV w �W ZW .l 1OVal `E 'ON EJNlll=l NV1S NIV1Nnori N C> f->.71 �_ X ASVd MOM MINIM _ ... E 3OVdS 1NVN311VIO2l3NIWOO / iVIM1Sf ONi 9 3JVN S cc Q IIIIIIIIIIIIII 1N3WdOl3n30 AlIV3U 101 / dnoNo 1V11dV0 GNM a o F I / I ( / / I I / I / II I II I II II I 'I �I II III I I I I II � Ld II 3t9.z5�eaN `1 11 " I IM W, i � G vilm", wz a p r— Z o w p v >w f9 Q w �W ZW a 9a� � F I / I ( / / I I / I / II I II I II II I 'I �I II III I I I I II � Ld II 3t9.z5�eaN `1 11 " I IM W, i � G vilm", r� 0 0 0 � �a IIIIIIIIIIIIII O O N O D O ,.. •� OMS O(IVUOl00 'NOAH A lOHal '£ 'ON JNIl13 21HIS NIH1Nnor4 �m z oma¢ASW Mom 390INdliM o Cm _W ? a= 30HdS 1NHN31 IVMJ3WW00 / 1HRl1Sf1(3NI'S 30V801S 1N3WdOl3A30 Al1H3H 101 / df ouo lHlldHO ONni 0 / / I / / I / / I / / 1 i ---—�--------� — —--_—� —mac.;---��) , 25 c EL W N z a LU a >�C cn Q Zw ii Wo� �- Z � W oaa w 3 co / / I / / I / / I / / 1 i ---—�--------� — —--_—� —mac.;---��) , 1 I ' \ O > ag U -j Ym al __ __ e Am r O IJ,.Or ! ,�, d• rr _ � s 1 \ r��� { I 'I' I I I\ ;,��,��� ,� ,•� �, �' t' *'i' !'' � Iii � r r .� ♦ 4 r ' � 4i' } ' • '\ 1 \ +4: r' �1 I' ��,. tt (,t, 1 •� /sr r ,� / tr, 1 y,,Y '� y • 1A.1 r O ,f.,l4 I ;( �` ,r � j' • , 1 a `'�. l4t � t 't f �,�� „l -,41 . J i � 4 � �` ` !•� r M / 'r ! ! '. � � �,# �bl �+ ��� � �,Ij4 � � � ��� ��f.. r, � � �I I I 1 { Jj j 222 I ,I T� j it �FJt.. r•. M1 {1� t�' ir�� _' EE�� �} �" �,, I \ \ \ I ll , '\'may M1. m 1 M '`• 1 m I ~ \ \ \ H O I Q � � I ' 8111P 1181HX9 �dO-iS %0V O(IVHO-100 `NOAV £ 'oN JNI-1H HViS NIViNnon Jlll�t�d� �JddO1S Jl 1�`ddl Ni Rva ON m m J r 40 m "c Dw Z 6 o N La W W N W r U 0 _ _ _ _ 1 I ' \ O > ag U -j Ym al __ __ e Am r O IJ,.Or ! ,�, d• rr _ � s 1 \ r��� { I 'I' I I I\ ;,��,��� ,� ,•� �, �' t' *'i' !'' � Iii � r r .� ♦ 4 r ' � 4i' } ' • '\ 1 \ +4: r' �1 I' ��,. tt (,t, 1 •� /sr r ,� / tr, 1 y,,Y '� y • 1A.1 r O ,f.,l4 I ;( �` ,r � j' • , 1 a `'�. l4t � t 't f �,�� „l -,41 . J i � 4 � �` ` !•� r M / 'r ! ! '. � � �,# �bl �+ ��� � �,Ij4 � � � ��� ��f.. r, � � �I I I 1 { Jj j 222 I ,I T� j it �FJt.. r•. M1 {1� t�' ir�� _' EE�� �} �" �,, I \ \ \ I ll , '\'may M1. m 1 M '`• 1 m I ~ \ \ \ H O I Q � � I ' / / I �8 I m / a _ E. 0 D 0 Sol. mg is 7 M„bS.ZS.68S I I II n S + Ay I ole I II �I Z o. if .4• z l z 1` y/ 0 t o p : I. u • I O@ J $ ob O I W z Q� I r b pet. tl I t � o,j,� dy ,- V � • tl� le J� JO I / I N Z ` 00 Z� / I ' F aW IA I x / f m I &_ // I a R -•.S I a W ��• a g 1 � e. -` U I I x U I 8 o2 gr Q , I �M _J / I. 4r $ f I IY / `<„i E 0p"C f7 o O I �ib ` r 7 r 1 l,ib I 0 pe � y �� t �I ��I I • I �” \� ii w uW pPGPpnp u� pin 1 mz g � _8 N's .Z N - - 1N3h3SV3 Unan CNV 30VNI"(11 ,001 \ z NJV9135 ,0'SZ ow 3.bS,ZS.68N o \ \ \ z m I r� m Q O I — I-F I � 48 NV �11S ��`d�I�AO 04 dld0�00 'NOAb £ *ON JNI�I� dd1S NIt/1Nnon �kii- lov=1 B!Dvuois A iovHl AB NOISIA38 31V0 'ON m m n ID 10I— s o o m Z < uiw D m D O_ m r = /N� _ _ _ _ / / I �8 I m / a _ E. 0 D 0 Sol. mg is 7 M„bS.ZS.68S I I II n S + Ay I ole I II �I Z o. if .4• z l z 1` y/ 0 t o p : I. u • I O@ J $ ob O I W z Q� I r b pet. tl I t � o,j,� dy ,- V � • tl� le J� JO I / I N Z ` 00 Z� / I ' F aW IA I x / f m I &_ // I a R -•.S I a W ��• a g 1 � e. -` U I I x U I 8 o2 gr Q , I �M _J / I. 4r $ f I IY / `<„i E 0p"C f7 o O I �ib ` r 7 r 1 l,ib I 0 pe � y �� t �I ��I I • I �” \� ii w uW pPGPpnp u� pin 1 mz g � _8 N's .Z N - - 1N3h3SV3 Unan CNV 30VNI"(11 ,001 \ z NJV9135 ,0'SZ ow 3.bS,ZS.68N o \ \ \ z m I r� m Q O I — I-F I � �1� U IZ Jyy r, I .t . " N, N i \ \ 3m im �� ,``•, .A 5 � �i'� ;� A�,I S-• I I Vie: PAN .\ � m � Z . (,• �\ ,: s � ms`s � / � • 33 �3 r I '•I o a I 1 1 NV B!DVNIVU(I (INV JNIdd�IJ 0(TVH0100 'NOAV E *ON JNI�I� HVIS NlViNnon Aii-liov=l govu0lS A i0vul A9 NOISA3a 3140 'ON p] m - r ip � } � Ln � o o m 3 0 � o o = a o w r _ /�\ C0 U C. 1 _ _ _ _ �1� U IZ Jyy r, I .t . " N, N i \ \ 3m im �� ,``•, .A 5 � �i'� ;� A�,I S-• I I Vie: PAN .\ � m � Z . (,• �\ ,: s � ms`s � / � • 33 �3 r I '•I o a I 1 C. 1 S1N9MAOW JNIINHfll )ion 11 O(MO-100NOA Y £ *ON ONI-1I3 HVIS NiviNf10W �W-113V:J BIDVHOlS A i0VH1 p 31VO 'ON m m ^ a QQ��o N o } N CD W O 2w a in 5 c) dW W J Q o m z a c CV 2 U to 0 t.I � 0 J ♦ I O - - - 1, I J W \ / I �< p 110 2� I &o a 4. I I I �I I / IIII I� ;I Lo O wit II I x J YWW> / 1171. ! 5 CL � 0 till I II :u /ljl I '- 1 .F \\v t I 1 I Ci o a I 0 Q. 9 I' \\ \ \ <NI fJ J 'E 1 Y y •In �Z� f • f I s I I !o CV i^ I s J I � p ` 1 \ P I ' i ` I I I I p 31VO 'ON m m ^ a QQ��o N o } N CD W O 2w a in 5 c) dW W J Q o m z a c CV 2 U to 0 t.I � 0 J ♦ I O - - - 1, I J U I (O I to 0 t.I � 0 J ♦ I O 1, I J W \ / I �< p 110 2� I &o a 4. I I I �I I / IIII I� ;I Lo O I I if r J ♦ O 1, I J / p W a 4. I I �a2Q I I P wit II I x J YWW> / 1171. ! 5 CL � 0 till I II :u /ljl I '- \\v t I I l ♦ O 1, I J p W a 4. I I �a2Q I I wit II I x J YWW> ! 5 CL till I II :u /ljl I '- 1 9 I' \\ \ \ <NI fJ J I \ •In . I I� Z r— O O O r= U-), IIIIIIIII O O CV C=- O MR N l+) CD N V N CD � E Cr! = o U > rn c" cm W Q � �IIIIIIIII�� 0 OZ9L8 OOVaOlOO 'NOAV A IOVNl'£ 'ON ONllld 2JV1S NIb1Nf101N ASW MOM 3901MOIlM 30VdS INVN31 IVIOIGNNOO / 1V1211smNl V 3JV2lO1S 1N3WdOl3A3O Al1V3N 101 / dnoH!D 1V11dVO ONm I I II �I I I I I R I I I I I I LLL I I 9 N I I Q I Q Ij u a F— F \\ b. — — — Q I I I I I I Q I I I I I I I I I SII I I ! I 1-H W I i I I I Irl O o O O N o O H O I I I I I I ! I 'NOAV N cn. uD N N III��IIII��III OMO 00"0100 uW a�'] a0 '— lL'! A �) J11OVH1'£ 'ON �JNI113 21`d1S NIH1NflOW x o e II Z Y� co Q 3OVdS INVN31IVION3WWOO / iviusnONPR 3!DV801S Q 0 I I I I L I I I I I I I I 1131NdO13A310,UINGH 101 / dn6k 1V11ddO 4Nn i I I I I I I I I I I ! I I I I I I I I ! I I II I I I I L I I I khl I I I II r ;I I i 3� II R I I I I I I r li li , I I I I _ TF LLI I I l L I �G U i I I I I I I I I I I I I 3� II e I I I I i I r I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I 71- I II II I I I ! i � L 11 I I I 4 I C- I W — -- -��� I'• • II I i ......... ti 0 0 r I I' II _ n w I L I I i I I I I I • A-��A/YA'�A �1 II-) I I I I '� .O .A A.t A•t .0-,0L .0-�0L L I� O O O e4) IIIIIIIIII) II J O O N O D O a0 N CrJ cD N V N Lu = O U rn > rn v7 m W � Q � I� IIIIIIII 0 OZ968 Oab21O-100 'NOAV A 10VRU '£ 'ON JNIIIJ NNIS NIVkNno" ASVd MOM 3941Sd11M 30VdS INVN3l 1d108311411400 / iviusnONI'8 30"OIS lN3WdOl3n30 All`d3N 101 / dnoNo ldlldd0 ONm Q I I I I I I I I I I L= I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I r=� I I I I II I I LL 7- T _. I I I I I I I I I I a II I I I Q� I I I I n - int 'I II �- W) in I I I I I 6 a r I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I ( LIJ LU ' Iii I I � 1 1 i� -.� LIJZ i z m � a I I I i I I I I � I I I I 0_, .0-,t .0-,Y .0-�G (�bi)le)i6i) (� A•At .0-01 '�1 .0-�G '�0-�Y�0-(�f '� Z N O O O �7 II IIIIIIIIIIII N O c,O m N <h c0 N �„� N Lfi W ap i— cc Z t� Q W � Q � IIIIIIIIIIIIII 0 0 I I I I I I I I I I tl I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 0Z90 OOV"80100 'NOAV A 10Va1 '£ 'ON JNllld UV1S NIV1Nf10W ASVd ss3NISn8 3901SOlIM 30VdS 1NVN31IVIO83WW0O / 1VRl1Sn(INI V 3E)"OlS 1N3WdOl3A3a AllV3N 101 / dnoO io 1VlldVO ONni — �I W / ai I It— -— —A Lu LU I I � II O 9 I § I Qw — S- Q Z =oo OUM 0(3"0100'NOAV A 1O` I'£ 'ON JNllld NVIS NIVINf1OW =�X ASVJ SWISS 3901SQ11M T e " 3OVdS 1NVN31 IVIONEINNOO / lvla1snONI V 3E)"O1S z. 1N3W 013AM A1lt/3a 101 / dnoO jo 1Hlid`dO ONm E - ----- - �-gym z. �0 z o= �W J � a N W�cnm" m o � W � � e � a o II I II I I I I I I I LI II I I I o. I I cW I� I I I rLL I I_ 1 11 o_ E—= "--I cmo c= .N I I I I OtM 00"0'100 'NOAV oa v rn J110" -L'£ 'ON JNllld a`d1S NIV1Nf1O1N AM SUNISH 390IN01114 30`ddS 1NVN31 IVIG i3WWO0 / lt/Ia1SflONI V 3Jb801S (I I I I I I 1N3WdO-13A3(l KLIV3N -101 / dnoNE) Tdlld`d0 Mm gg Z m Z LU m4 0 o ®®®®® ®�®®®oo I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Fl =1 LLI I wl I ml I of I 1 I JI I I I I I I I I I I I �I 1 I 1 1 I I 0 I I � I � LLI LLl I I � LLI I I z. � O 0 �W I I i /1 r / im I I I I • a A n Z 0 9� II I I I I I II I o o N I=- E -0- IIIIIIIIII N� N EcD N V N W "� R .� U c-> ~ x 0 v E v W O U rn rn F, cn m Z r. cv Q o �IIIIIIII� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I � I I I � I I �u ' OMO 0aV2iOl00'NOAV i z- JllOV81'£'ON ONllld NV1S NIV1Nno" ASW SOON 3901SOl1M WI 30VdS iNVN311VI383INV400 / iviusnGNI V 30"OlS iN3WdOl3A3a AiIV3N 101 / dno0 je 1VlldVO ONn-1 U I •� ml LL o I 4 LU -A S a P ® I W LU S ; oaW IS ��, _ S S ® ® ® ® ® ® ®O O O WI � I •� ml LL o I 4 LU -A ® I J I LU S I IZ LU O I I Q� a •" I IJ I IZ z ri \`LAI S I I Q� a •" I IJ I \`LAI S � Z �Z 1 (0 o LL1 rI !� O LU Z a 0 n - � _ W Y I I! I 7g .. ' I Z OMO Odb'dO1OO 'NOAV A 1OV2U '£ 'ON ONllld WiS NIV.LNnoyy ASW SOON 390IN011M 30VdS INVN31 IVION3WWOO / TdIalSnONI T 3E)"O1S 1N3WdOl3A3a AL1t/3N 101 / dnoNE) IVlidV3 GNm i i i i ii 111 m Y m 0 Q 4 n n y m �LL I �W O Q LL N / J 4 Q 111 Y 0 n y m n �W 2 ti o 0 0� o II IIIIIIII O O N O C-14 co m `V � .� �W 0Z%8 OaVUOlOO 'NOAV F � pp - so klOVal'£ -ON ONIll3 HV1S NIV1Nnovy LU u - 'Q 3OVdS 1NVN31 IVIONMMOO / lVRilSnaNI V 3JVdO1S a o 1N3WdOl3A3(l iL 1V3H 101 / dnoNE) WildVO ONn"i =E, M o 0 a N a W M o N W Lu O e z m 0 W J a (� W N I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I o �mallN ,r; o L",, ' e i $ OZ968 OaV2iOlOO 'NOnV AIOVa1 �£'ON ONllld NV1S NIV1Nf10W �_; I I I — � o o V c I L)X w= o r- m � X I I I I I I I I I I I ASVd ss3Nisna 39 ;` I I z w U, • � � Z r— .o Q 30VdS 1NVN31 IVIOU31NW00/ 1V12d1sn(INI S 30"OlS 1" a J U ¢.. 1N3WdOl3A34 J.1-lV32i -101 / df102iJ 1H11dVO 4Nm o>8`a� • m � O f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I i $ I I I I I I I f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I $ I I I W� 09 s O f I I I LL LLI I I I I I I I I I O RI, ILL I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I -- - I --- --El--- I I I I I I I I o I I N N m I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I i I O I I m ul �ul I I I I I I I I I LL I Z p5 '*—C=' 0 o f Lea O O N O O o 4 I I N f"7 Cp N V N I LJ ASVd SWISH 39a1S411M L z w LU o>� LU 30VdS 1N`dN31 lt/IONMMOO / iviusnONl T 3E)"OlS v v = O U rn lNMUOl3A30 AllV3N l01 / dnoHE) ldllddO GNm U Um - oC9iX Q I I Cp - —�— Y W y IF 7HI 0 I I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I OM9 00"0-103'NOnd o 4 A1OV8i'UON JNllld HVIS NI` INno" �;;, ASVd SWISH 39a1S411M g$ z w LU o>� LU 30VdS 1N`dN31 lt/IONMMOO / iviusnONl T 3E)"OlS $HS. • m lNMUOl3A30 AllV3N l01 / dnoHE) ldllddO GNm U I I I I I 1 IL LJ I I I I I I I I - - - —�— Y I I 7HI I I I 4 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I �9 IS) , I I I J id') LL 6 W I - - - ® - 1'Q1 O LL I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I E3 - - 0 - - - -[I}- I - I ( I I I I 1 1 I LU } LU I � I I I I I I z m I I � w J I I I I I I I � a 4J N I I i I I I I LF IL---J,--],Hl I I I I I r� 0 0 Z � O O N F w m w Dov F cnm o E=- `� O � O �v oa > m (IIIIIIII II a > OM9 OOV'dO100'NOnd A 1OVH-L '£ 'ON JNllld NNIS NI`d1NnoiN ASW ss3Nisna 3901S011M 3OVdS 1NVN31 lVM13WWOO / 1vI81snC]Nl'8 3JtRlO1S 1N3lNdOl3A3(l KLIV 11O1 / dnoHE) lVllddO GNm LL OMS 0(3"0100'NOAV A 1Oj"IVON ON111:1 NViS NIVINnovq -ASVd. SUNISH 3901SOUM 30VdS INVNM WMIMNOO/ iviasn(INIS 3E)VIJOIS 1111, 1 I I IN3V4dOl3A34 AlIV3U 101 / dnoNE) lV-LldV0 GN" I j 7E] �= BEE IN 7E❑1 FE 11 I® ® ®® 0 ou)9 0. • LU co 0 F4 �= BEE IN 7E❑1 FE 11 I® ® ®® 0 z ? ti C O O O N W W ep '-x0 � O V v� m _ s; Z r� O W J 0 OZ9 9O(I"OIOO'NOAV A lOV81'£ 'ON JNllld NNIS NI`d1Nnov4 ASVd SHISH 39014011M 30VdS 1NVN31 IVIONMINOO / ivi8isn(INl '8 3E)VUO1S 1N3WdO13AM KLIV3N 10l / dnouE) ldllddO ONni �I �I 4co� cyON I I I I I � 0 m f — �u I � w I / ® I I 'y O I I I � a o I I -4 �o • i Q � s O I z m D lh s W � a �b I trl" Y 4co� cyON hii .UJV� c c m I �\ I I ® \\ a �p I O lh s W w � I O ® \ 07 ® ® \\ b Z m -1 @ Q I QQ Memo To: Planning and Zoning Commission Prom: Matt Pielsticker, Planner O�q Dale February 1, 2006 Re: Special Review Use Application - Nursery Tree Sales Lots 3 & 6, McGrady Acres Subdivision Summary: AVON C O L O R A D O Staff has been working with the applicant of this application in order to make the application full and complete for staff review. In order to provide a full and thorough review of the application, staff and the applicant require additional time to collect and examine further information related to the application. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that a public hearing be held at the Commission's February 7, 2006 meeting, as required by Section 17.12.100 of the Avon Municipal Code, and this agenda item be tabled until the March 7, 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. February 7, 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting McGrady Acres Special Review Use Application Page JOHN AND CAROL KRUEGER P.O. Box 1551 Vail, Colorado 81658 (regular mail) (970) 949-1198 (H) (970) 949-9115 (W) ckrueger@vail.net February 3, 2006 VIA E- MAIL Recording Secretary, Town of Avon P.O. Box 975 Avon, Colorado 81620 Re: Lots 3 and 6, McGrady Acres Dear Sir/Madam: I am writing in connection with the Special Review Use application on file for a landscaping nursery for retail sales. As a neighboring property owner whose residence is a few houses away and also as an owner of property in McGrady Acres, we have no issue with this use being made of the property. I only have several concerns about the material submitted for the application since it very general: 1. What does 'B & B" mean on the drawing? I see no structures and so assume there are none planned to conduct sales. 2. I am not sure where the fence between the property and the adjacent cul de sac ends, but it does not extend fully around the boundary of the cul de sac (this has always been a concern of mine). I cannot tell where the fence ends on the submitted site plan, but I am concerned about the drive extending to the rear of the property and the placement of parking along the boundary closest to the neighboring residential properties. Please confirm there is a fence along this part of the property. I see no reason why the activities causing visual, noise and other impacts cannot be placed closer to Post Boulevard. 3. I am interested in the parameters of the approval, i.e., whether there is intention to operate at night and what kind of lighting would be necessary for this (I am thinking of Christmas time and the giant Santa on top of the building in Eagle -Vail and whether that could happen here and be illuminated for miles around). I know that the use would need to comply with all applicable codes but the Town can place conditions on a special use that are appropriate for this residential area. I will not be in town on the hearing date of February 7, 2006 but will be interested in the results of the meeting. Thank you for allowing this input. Very truly yours, Carol Krueger Page 1 of 1 Matt Pielsticker From: Greg Bartock [bbivail@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2006 12:19 PM To: Matt Pielsticker Subject: 2/7/06 Matt, I am home owner living next to lots 3&6, McGrady Acres on EagleBend Dr. I have some concerns on Tracer Creek proposal for the landscaping business. 1. Noise control of equipment and trucks 2. Dust control 3. Shortage of trees planted at the end of EagleBend Dr that was promised in the original contract of the cult a sack construction. Tracer Creek were to donate and plant additional trees would be great. Greg 2/7/2006 SELS'. 'T'S., p.RACE TA1�I c r Y � DS FF h a •'IiE S(.r..�c:.,t� )ti .. xS.. ..4 �N.; Jy L4i�� �.�� + Z�r• .y . { "}".� ' l� psi .,,} t %`�• -lr r ^3,r 2.3,StT �, t� .��.. •tt: t "rjst c'y�w ,�•si r ,. a•� i �'.�h_ t r:� .i '.aa ..r h, � __ - i^r�;._^.•�-�:z3r�a;, ..x'i..,.. APPENDIX 3: TRAFFIC GENERATION AN4Y515 TRAFFIC GENERATED BY SELF STORAGE FACILITIES 111'rpaI rd I)fj: Econolnic Can..0:Idill Arsacin fe's 201 E. Soudrrrrt Ai crull Sir 200 Tnnpr. AZ S32S2-5140 OVERVIEW Lconomic Consrdlin(! .\sso6ates, Inc. conducted :i stud_r to determine hunt much traffic is :ic•neraed h% sell' simage, The stud% was performed under the sponsorship of ilio Sell SluraCe Association. Olu Sti011mti l'CS tiere Ilplpnl-e,d 4111 TodI IC fl%IIiIJI)IC u. members. An indrpendent:ulalcsis of tilt results tyres perf'oruhcd. Kespondcltr. ranged from %cr% small to ver% Inrgc facilities tlnuuchuul the Cniie(Stale'. Derails of our stuck' report iidiuw. PURPOSE 'I'hc aim of [hie .fully is Io iiccurately mcasole and determine ho.% much traffic is eeneratcd he self sturase facilities. Tu this end, the Self Stoi%lcc Associ:tI inn (SSA) ca fit lac ted t%iIII Lco It om I Consulting Tempe. AZ. a firm with expel ience in chin Field. to conduct an independent stud%. APPROACH •The SSA pl-cpared a standard qucstionnairt that self stor.iev operators could use to record traffic dam. The ('(.rill was delivered to all members of the SS.\ and [vas also publidzel on the Internet. in n CClinl±s With operators.:tud through other distribution channels (ecu farm in AppcndIx It, Page Ili l ). Congllcfed questionnaires were returned to the association and 1%crc prut'idcd to us lire analysis. EC.\ inspected tilt gnCSnonrmtres. obtained additional informatiun In calling MStxmdenrs tenet) data lyre incomplete or required clarification, checked life addition on the fors, assennbied and anal -red file data and provided this repm-i of the results. Curtain questionnaires were not used in the studs fora variety of reasons. which included dicgihilip•. they were incomplete or the resiwndcnt s ftcility was not a topical self storage business. The latrer included a combination self storageand office warehouse and another which was primarily an K\' storage. for example. Since only fine questionnaire was received for Canada, it was also excluded. (hl, facilities that had seven day a week auxss were included ill the anal•sis. since nearly all of the respondents were open for bluiuess Sond:ry through SJturdJy.'Tu include others that did not opertte seven days a week tcnuld have been inconsistent. in our opinion. pinnih. data was based on computerized gine entries durnl¢ file months of April through Junc of ^_001. RESPONDENT PROFILE Phis stud, contained 158 usable• responses. While this is .l small fractiun,uf file 35,000 plus taeilitics in file U.S.. it is the second Inrg-vst respon:v of any public Iv available study on this subject. LC.\ conducted a prior self storage uaffnc anahsis nn behalf of the %lini-Storage ]lessengemagazine in Fchruary 1995 ("Dispelling the Seif-Stuui6c TratTtc Mvrh'•) that was hosed on data front over 25(1 facilities. The SS:\ studv is helic%rtl to he more repn•sentaive of the industrv. because this cmrcnt data is based on the average sized laciliry of 45.000 square feet from over 90 cities in the United States. The response in file earlier study teas fused on information from facilities smaller than tilt .ocragv project. The mode of respondent facilities in this current stein, contained 500 to 599 spaces and nervi% one- third (31.65'•o )h Jd 6001)r 11 MTC SIIaCeS, bel' CXaltlpltl (sec' Tabdt• I). r 3 TABLE 1 RESPONDENTS BY NUMBER OF SPACES SPACES NUMBER OF TOTAL 1O0-199 4 2.53 200-299 7 4.43 :300-:09 22 13.v- 3.92400499 400499 34 21.5-' 5100-599 41 25.95 600699 23 14.56 700-794 12 7.54 8(10-549 4 2.53 900999 4 2.5:1 1,000-1049 _ 127 1.100-1.199 1 1.27 1-100.1?94 2 1:17 1.:100-1.399 it 0 1.4110.1:199 0 0 1'500-1,599 D 0 1600-I.WW O 0 1,700-1.799 1 41.63 '1'oml 158 101p W, Srmrtr: Twat and prrrr'ntqur ramtwed 1{p IGinminic The averac size of respondcuts leas 59,431 rentable sq. ft. (See Tabic 21. TABLE 2 AVERAGE SIZE OF RESPONDENTS (In It,,Ihrb ( Sq. FC; shows that the mode mas benrcen i0.000 and 59.999 rentable sq. ft. The greatest concentration of respondents were in the 40,000 to 70.000 range. Total Krntablc 5q. Pt. 4,279,113 Su, of Re'l undents 15fi' A wTaCe 51Zc 14'481 -Two"id nor In':.•n dr rrntuirlr sq. fi. Snrat'r: :lrrnulr' euRlPurni 1.11 Linden uric ('nrenfi r+gf aos:•�iay.. TABLE 3 AVERAGE SIZE OF RESPONDENTS (hl RrnuddrSq. M.I Respondents facilities ran^cd in size from 1:411110 rentahlc sq. fr. m uvcT 11i0.Ot1O..\n anahsis of respontictrrs by rr tit able sq. It. is AM)"" in'It NUMBER % OF TOTAL 111.000.19.994 :1 1.92 3(1.(011-29 X199 6 3.35 :Itl,(1w--32999 is 11.54 40,0110.49.999 29 18.59 50,0(1(1-19,499 33 '11.15 60,000-69.999 27 17.31 70.000.79.994 13 8.33 80.000-89.994 12 7.64 40.0110-99.999 8 5.13 100.1100-109.999 4 2.5(1 110.110(-119999 1 0.64 1'0.4)(10-129.9' 1 0.64 1(30.000 164,944) I 0.134 Total 156 94.9911 'I ws nor rnt411Of/%ducr0Fmindimit. The Western Reei... I of the SclF Stm auc Association had the largest number of respondents, followed by the Southeast region lsee'1'abh• 4). This is consistent with fact that the former is the lortcst. In terms of 111Crnbei,hlp. A list oI Starts by SSA RQ0011 IS provided in ApIvndis "_ TABLE 4 RESPONSE BY REGION NUMBER m OF TOTAL Northeast 25 15.82 Central 29 183 5 soulilcast 48 :30.3111 %fest 56 35.44 TOT11 158 94.94'1:' 'llnr:<unt Iorn1 !d0 "o due m ruundinq There were some differences in by region in the average size of respondents in rentable sq, ft. when Contparud to the total response. The Central and Western Region respondents were larger than thus, in the Northeast and SOtltheaSt Regions (sur fable 51. TABLE 5 RESPONDENT SIZE BY REGION (in Rettnhlr 5q. F7. ) 'Our Impnadrnf front rnr'I1 o11 hrvr rr_7i,r2s did rrat 11.51 ml. ft Snnr're: Tnfnf�rnu(!rn'['rntrnt<>ronfputrA'h+r Er.'nrt,rmir Caneuldriq : isv,r irurs. Ther I]SO hall more .paces (atL'I;IIde fi). TABLE 6 RESPONDENT SIZE (Ia !:r nrbonl'Sprrt'n ) SO. FT, NO. RESPONSES Ar. SIZE \orthcast I,402.S84 25 511,115 Central 1,797.708 29 111.9411 Somheasr ?.(i94:'03 47' .;7.3'23 West 3139.1.318 55, 61.5:1:1 'fatal 9.279.11:1 1511 59.481 'Our Impnadrnf front rnr'I1 o11 hrvr rr_7i,r2s did rrat 11.51 ml. ft Snnr're: Tnfnf�rnu(!rn'['rntrnt<>ronfputrA'h+r Er.'nrt,rmir Caneuldriq : isv,r irurs. Ther I]SO hall more .paces (atL'I;IIde fi). TABLE 6 RESPONDENT SIZE (Ia !:r nrbonl'Sprrt'n ) Somrn Mid TRAFFIC GENERATION An average or 6.82 vehicles per day entered these facilities for ever' 100 self ..torage spaces, accordim; m our snide results (sec Table 7). TABLE 7 TRAFFIC GENERATED BY SELF STORAGE Vehicles Entering 13cilities: Dar .;•465 Total Spaces In Facilities 87.413 Average RIT'z Per Spacriper 11a}' .111132 AN, ]UT's Per Day. leer too'Storage Spates 6.82 This mcanS that if a taCilit V had 910 storage Spaces. it would generate an Overage of 34 cars Per day. For 700, it tsould average 48 (see Traffic Generator Calculator in Table 8). TABLE S TRAFFIC GENERATOR CALCULATOR (8asrd Ou to SO I rhid, x IV t 1110 .rlf St[ntlyr span•>) NUMBER OF AV, VEHICLES SPACES GENERATED 100 SPACES NO. OF RESPONSES A\'. SIZE IN SPACES Northeast 12:189 '25 5110 Central 15.736 39 .54:1 Soutllcaat 25.18? 48 525 West 34.001i Sit 607 'ental 57.41:; 158 553 Somrn Mid TRAFFIC GENERATION An average or 6.82 vehicles per day entered these facilities for ever' 100 self ..torage spaces, accordim; m our snide results (sec Table 7). TABLE 7 TRAFFIC GENERATED BY SELF STORAGE Vehicles Entering 13cilities: Dar .;•465 Total Spaces In Facilities 87.413 Average RIT'z Per Spacriper 11a}' .111132 AN, ]UT's Per Day. leer too'Storage Spates 6.82 This mcanS that if a taCilit V had 910 storage Spaces. it would generate an Overage of 34 cars Per day. For 700, it tsould average 48 (see Traffic Generator Calculator in Table 8). TABLE S TRAFFIC GENERATOR CALCULATOR (8asrd Ou to SO I rhid, x IV t 1110 .rlf St[ntlyr span•>) NUMBER OF AV, VEHICLES SPACES GENERATED 100 7 200 1.1 300 20 4410 27 500 34 1100 .11 700 48 81111 g; 900 Fl I moll (i9 1.11111 75 1 100 g2 1,300 gra 1.400 :15 1.500 10'2 1.600 1114 1.71111 Illi This i? Ices than the 3.33 vFhicics PC•r lac per 100 ,pares that we found in our 1496 ..Iudr pertircmrd for dte 0, L Land Use: 151 Mini -Warehouse Description A mini -warehouse is a building in which a storage unit or vault is rented for the storage of goods. Each unit Is physically separated from other units and access is usually provided through an overhead door or other common access point. Additional Data Information on transit trip ends is not available. Information on person trip ends is not available. Truck trips accounted for 2 to 15 percent of the weekday traffic at the sites surveyed. Vehicle occupancy ranged from 1.2 to 1.9 persons per automobile on an average weekday, Peak hours of the generator: Weekdays between 2;00 and 5:00 P.M. Saturdays between 12:00 Noon and 1:00 P.M. Sundays between 1:00 P.M. and 4:00 P.M. The studies were conducted at facilities in the San Francisco Bay Area and southern California in 1979 and 1986. At the sites surveyed. the average number of employees was 2 (range of 1 to 4), the average gross floor area was 49,000 square feet (range of 18.000 to 89.000), the average number of storage units was 613 (range of 195 to 840), and the average number of acres was 3 (range of 2 to 6). Average Densities Employees Per 1,000 S uare Feet Gross Floor Area 0.05 Employees Per Gross Acre 0.69 Employees Par Storage Unit 0,004 1,000 Square Feet Gross Floor Area Per Stora a Unit 0.10 1,000 Square Feet Gross Floor Area Per Gross Acre 14.93 Gross Acres Per Stora a Unit 0.006 Source Numbers 113,212 Trip Generation, January 1991 Institute of Transportation Engineers RECEIVED FEB 0 7 2006 Community Development Mini -Warehouse (151) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 11 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 49 Directional Distribution: 52% entering, 48% exiting rip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross t-loor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0,28 013-0.50 0.54 Data Plot ana so b 30 20 10 X :x X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Aetual Data Polnta - Find Curve ----- Avera0e Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) - 0.026(X) + 1.092 R2 . 0.77 Trip Generation. January 1991 Institute of Transportation Engineers ate l TZI P x ":. X :x X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Aetual Data Polnta - Find Curve ----- Avera0e Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) - 0.026(X) + 1.092 R2 . 0.77 Trip Generation. January 1991 Institute of Transportation Engineers ate l TZI P Mini -Warehouse (151) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Saturday, Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 6 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 62 Directional Distribution: Not available rip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.40 0.24-0.60 0.64 4100101001110110 jaza riot ano W x 20 ......... :........ .:........ ..:...... ........ .;..........:......... x x: 10 ........ '.....r��! '.........:.........'.........:......... ;.........:......... 0 �n 9n 11 M V1 M )a as X a 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points - Flit" Curve ------ Avaregs Rate Fitted Curve Equation: T = ((3.059/X) - 0.00344]-1 R2 = 0.92 Trip Generation, January 1991 Institute of Transportation Engineers tic)�15Qo S6�t'�c C = aar4r1p �3o°O�asoo 750 SPAA-6S NUMbliec.') ACr hWaI Mini -Warehouse (151) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Sunday, Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 6 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 62 Directional Distribution: Not available Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.30 0.19-0.61 0.55 uaca rfol ana 40 x ....... .......................................... 70 w ]O !O X = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area x 4 1..1 Data Pains - Ple.d Curv. ------ Av.r.a. Raw Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.011(X) + 2.177 R2 = 0.49 Trip Generation. January 1991 Institute of Transportation Engineers 1000[l, = 3333 S6t�'9 = l �+�1 X333 - as SP�s �� DPr411L &A n, .,� a Mini -Warehouse (151) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Storage Units On a: Saturday, Peak Hour of Generator mom Number of Studies: 6 Average Number of Storage Units: 613 Directional Distribution: Not available Trip Generation per Storage Unit vara viol ana eo I- 10 0 X = Number of Storage Units X Actual Data Points - Flow Curva Fitted Curve Equation: T = [(33.979/X) - 0.00942]'1 Trip Generafion. January 1991 ------ Avenge Rate R2 = 0.91 Institute of Transportation Engineers . oq x oa = Mini -Warehouse (151) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Storage Units On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 6 Average Number of Storage Units: 613 Directional Distribution: Not available Trip Generation per Storage Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.03 0.02-0.05 0.18 vasa rtut anu an r oL �w zw aw 406 500 600 100 800 900 X = Number of Storage Units % Actual Opts Point@ - F1n.0 Curva ------ Awra9. Rata Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.00187(X) . 1.722 RZ = 0.59 Trip Generation, January 1991 Institute of Transportation Engineers -0bx L( 00 ^ 1z"'. 7ttps -03x 60o - Pe Z Rr Views -• kbwz. r Mini -Warehouse (151) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Storage Units On a: Sunday, Peak Hour of Generator Number of Studies: 6 Average Number of Storage Units: 613 Directional Distribution: Not available Trip Generation per Storage Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.03 0.02 - 0.06 0.17 �v"aau�rtoc a�na � e F 10 0 X . Number of Storage Units x Aqua Data point. - rltte.l C.... Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.421 Ln(X) r 0.189 Trip Generation, January 1991 ------ Awraa. Rat. R2 . 0.35 Institute of Transportation Engineers ()" t -C' IF . o3x boo lor-Aps P8<. X .........:....................; .........:........... �:...... X 100 200 3m 400 Soo X . Number of Storage Units x Aqua Data point. - rltte.l C.... Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.421 Ln(X) r 0.189 Trip Generation, January 1991 ------ Awraa. Rat. R2 . 0.35 Institute of Transportation Engineers ()" t -C' IF . o3x boo lor-Aps P8<. ipA a - d� . � h - i} '�� � }tom • ' - - � ,,R'.ETU RrN1 b. l ylc, 4 . 1 a (1 Y a , Planning and Zoning Commission}. Meeting Minutes — February 7,200 o-` tx.• z k .; h, 1 41 1 G a,a� ��sx'"'z�, � 4•' Irl t� .. i _ �^ i �'i i 1 i (YY• 1 �� • O T.�.�V at .fT. 1^ t ` � r• • i'f`.�x 1 44•. `�i'!r'�9.x�'.1Tti`-.��i`d ..r�-. y, } N ipA a - d� . � h - i} '�� � }tom • ' - - � ,,R'.ETU RrN1 b. l ylc, 4 . 1 a (1 Y a , Planning and Zoning Commission}. Meeting Minutes — February 7,200 o-` tx.• z k .; h, 1 41 1 G a,a� ��sx'"'z�, � 4•' Irl t� .. i _ �^ i �'i i 1 i (YY• 1 �� • O T.�.�V at .fT. 1^ t ` � r• • i'f`.�x 1 44•. `�i'!r'�9.x�'.1Tti`-.��i`d ..r�-. y,