Loading...
PZC Minutes 07-01-2008 (2)Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission �- N Meeting Minutes for July 1, 2008 V0 Avon Town Council Chambers Meetings are open to the public c o L o R A D O Avon Municipal Building / 400 Benchmark Road WORK SESSION (5:OOpm — 5:30pm) Description: Discussion of Regular Meeting agenda items. Open to the public. REGULAR MEETING (5:30pm) Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:38 pm. Roll Call All Commissioners were present. III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda There were no amendments to the Agenda. IV. Conflicts of Interest There were no conflicts of interest. Commissioner Green clarified that he does not have a conflict of interest for Item VII. V. Consent Agenda Approval of the June 17, 2008 Meeting Minutes Commissioner Green moved to approve the consent agenda, and Commissioner Lane seconded the vote. The motion passed with a 5-0 vote; Commissioners Goulding and Evans abstained due to their absence from the June 17, 2008 meeting. VI. Harry A. Nottingham Park Master Plan Update Property Location: Tract G, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Description: The Vail Architecture Group is to present conceptual master plan materials, findings and recommendations from the community charrettes and surveys. Discussion: Matthew Gennett presented staffs memorandum. Mariana Boldu, VAg, Inc, and Sherry Dorward presented a PowerPoint presentation which focused on the process currently completed, the next steps, and a draft plan. Sherry continued with a summary of the results from the two design charrettes. She also highlighted the Park Survey that was completed by Linda Venturoni. Sherry commented that the most frequent comments from the public meetings were to keep the passive uses of the park, improve the lighting on pedestrian paths, and add a venue for performing arts and similar events. Sherry also stated that the survey produced similar desires for the park. Commissioner Green asked what the concern was with funding for year round uses versus seasonal uses. Sherry Dorward stated that the seasonal uses would be items like ice skating on the lake and cross country skiing during the winter months. Ia Commissioner Evans asked why there are discrepancies between the West Town Center Investment Plan and the Nottingham Park plan and whether both presented at the public design charrettes. Sherry Dorward stated that she has heard that there is not much support for an inn on the current Municipal Complex parcel. She stated that the draft plan will address the inn by stating that the plan does not recommend the inn in that location but rather that back-of-house/service uses and limitedparking would be a better alternative. Commissioner Green asked where the lack of support for an inn originated and what the plan was for the intersection of Main and Lake Streets. With regard to the first question, Matt Gennett stated that staff has received comments from numerous members of the public and immediate neighbors of the park that an inn would not be in the best interest of the community. Justin Hildreth responded to the second question stating the steps for Lake Street that went into the park at the intersection with Main Street are to be removed from the construction of Lake Street. The reason is that a design for that intersection will be a part of the Main Street construction plans and possibly built next year in accordance with the Park Plan and the Main Street design. Sherry then continued her presentation by outlining some of the ideas that were brought forth that did not seem to work in the park. These included a skate park, a dog park, cross country ski trails, and improvements to the beach. Sherry then outlined the concept master plan depicting the proposed improvements and phasing. Commissioner Evans asked what the bullet about the skating on the soccer field meant. Sherry commented that there was potential to flood the soccer field to provide ice skating on the field. It would provide a lesser liability and longer season of use. Commissioner Evans stated he doesn't understand why we would flood the field when we have a lake that suffices. Commissioner Green asked what the reason is for having two separate treatments for the lake edge. Sherry stated the need for boulders exists only around the dam portion of the lake for engineering/support reasons. Commissioner Struve asked staff whether the parking situation would be fixed if the parking garage was built. Matt Gennett stated that it could but the parking garage is not going to be built in the near term and would likely not accommodate future capacity needs. He also commented that if Main Street develops the way the town envisions, parking capacity could be consumed by Main Street and more would be needed for the park. Commissioner Struve asked if demonstration gardens would be programmed into the plan. Sherry did state that community gardens and demonstration gardens could be provided in the park but there is not an abundance of space for those uses. Commissioner Prince asked if the play area was to be moved. Sherry Dorward stated that a second play area would be provided on the western portion of the park and upgraded equipment would be needed on the east side. Larry Brooks commented that there is a possibility to put a trail to the south of the water treatment plant. He thinks that we should put a trail in the plan and that it be included as a possibility. Commissioner Lane wanted to see more "pocket parks" within the larger park. He wants some semi -private areas. He also wanted to see Main Street branch into the park instead of die at the park. He liked that edge comments that were made by the design team for the lake. U Commissioner Goulding questioned the upgraded lighting comments. Sherry responded that the lights should be sustainable and she said that it could be either bollards or pole lights but the objective is to only light the paths enough to ensure safety. Commissioner Goulding stated that it could be difficult to get young kids to Scope C and he would want that programmed for the correct age group. He also stated that he has not heard responses from the Avon Recreation Center and what is the need for better athletic fields or a change in the size and configuration of the athletic fields. Commissioner Struve thanked the design team on the quality job they have done thus far. Commissioner Roubos does not want to see structures placed in the park. Commissioner Prince stated that the park is heading toward passive recreation. He also thinks a disconnection exists between the east and west parts of the park. He stated that better signage and information about what is allowed for public use in the park would be a good improvement. He also wanted to hear about how tourists and second homeowners use the park. Matt Gannett stated that the survey contains the information and it can be cross tabulated to extract the pertinent data. VII. Sketch Design Review — Residential Single -Family Property Location: Lot 7, Western Sage PUD / 5771 Wildridge Road East Applicant: The Reynolds Corporation / Owner. Beowulf Lot 7 LLC Description: Sketch Design review for a single-family residence on a Western Sage PUD property, accessed off Wildridge Road East at the top of Wildridge. Discussion: Matthew Pielsticker presented staffs report. Sean Reynolds outlined a few items from the staff report. He stated that the building does step with the lot slope and reduces the amount of retaining walls by building a platform for the house to sit on. Commissioner Struve asked the height of the two retaining walls to the south of the building and what the approximate height was? The applicants responded that those walls have heights of 6 feet and 4 feet tall, respectively. Commissioner Lane asked about building height calculation and perceived height due to retaining walls. Buzz Reynolds stated that the easement has already been given for Lot 7 across Lot 6. Commissioner Evans asked what the height of the retaining wall is by the driveway. Sean Reynolds responded that the height was 10 feet on the lower side and 2 to 4 feet on the upper end. Commissioner Evans questioned the 3D model and how it is different from the site plans provided. He also stated that the garage elevation is quite repetitious and needs to be enhanced. Commissioner Green stated that there are inconsistencies between elevations on the building. It appears that there are some elevations that have certain elements and there are others that are missing the same elements. He also stated that the windows appear to be placed in the walls and there are no indications that the windows are operable. Commissioner Lane stated that many of the issues that are arising now most likely would snowball into larger issues down the road and they need to be addressed at an early stage. Commissioner Evans stated that he has no issues with the size of the home, but stated that this lot many not be a good location for a house of this size. IZ Commissioner Prince stated that he would like to see the heights of each retaining wall. Commissioner Evans stated that he would like to see the studies that prove this is the option with the least amount of retaining walls. Commissioner Struve asked what colors were planned for. Buzz stated that the colors of the rock are the samples shown and the windows would be a gray hue. Commissioner Roubos stated that she was concerned about the size of the proposed house and square footage. Commissioner Goulding stated he doesn't have a problem with the size, but does have a problem with the massing. The building needs to be stepped down not up the hillside. He also wanted to see a parking study to show proper movement in the driveway. As this is a Sketch Design application, no formal action was taken. VIII. Avon 21 PUD Zoning Application —CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING Property Location: Lots 21, 65A, 65B, Tract Q, and Parcel TK -3, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision / 62, 68, and 182 Benchmark Road Applicant/ Owner. Brian Judge, Orion Development Description: The applicant, Pedro Campos of the Vail Architecture Group, representing the owner of the property, EAH, LLC, is proposing a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) and a concurrent Preliminary Plan for Subdivision on a new development site comprised of the properties listed above, which are currently zoned Town Center (TC). The proposed PUD is envisioned to be a contemporary mixed-use development including retail space, office space, residential and lodging uses in three new buildings to be located on the site. Discussion: Matt Gennett, Planning Manager, presented the outline for the meeting and staffs report included in the Commissioner packets. The Staff report outlines the policies from both the Comprehensive Plan and East Town Center District plan. Commissioner Struve questioned Planning Principle #14, maximizing solar exposure, and whether that meant limited shaded areas. Mr. Gennett responded that while vague, this planning principle can imply limiting shaded areas. Pedro Campos, representing the owners of the property, introduced the presentation and the outline of his presentation. Pedro went through the Planning Principals stated in the Comprehensive Plan in an attempt to show how the proposed PUD complies with each principal. Commissioner Evans questioned how the floor plates, specifically the plaza level, related to the current grades on the site. Pedro continued the presentation by illustrating how the proposed PUD complies with the East Town Center Plan. Commissioner Evans asked how the proposed project compares to the number of floors from illustrated in the East Town Center Plan. Pedro stated that the proposed project complies in most instances as the buildings vary between 6-8 stories. Commissioner Evans stated that he believes the residential street designation in the East Town Center Plan is intended to drive the street size but not the use on the street level. Commissioner Evans informed the applicant that he believes the uses there should still be commercial or retail. ,t Pedro referred Mr. Evans to the section detail of the residential street side of the project depicted in the ETCD Plan and the "residential" label on the detail for the whole building. Commissioner Evans asked how the revised traffic study is progressing. Pedro responded that their traffic engineer is reviewing their work to ensure that it is correct. Commissioner Evans asked about acquisition of water rights and sewer rights. He asked where they were currently in the process of acquiring these rights. Brian Judge asked that the Planning and Zoning Commission only look at the uses so that the applicants can determine their exact requirements. Commissioner Evans opened the Public Hearing for Public Comment. Kent Biedel, owner of Loaded Joe's, wanted to reiterate his comments from previous meetings. He did determine that by code he would need about 10 parking spaces, but during peak hours the number of parking spaces can grow to the 20-25 range. He stated that the surface parking is a lifeline for his business and wouldn't occupy a location without that adequate parking. He offered his business as a place to hold a public outreach meeting if the Town and Applicant wanted a place to hold additional meetings. Commissioner Evans stated that the current parking code is flawed, but is unsure what the amounts should be. He stated that parking would be dealt with on a project by project basis. Kent stated that the affordability issue related to tenant spaces is another concern and that he would like to see rent controlled retail spaces. Commissioner Evans closed the Public Comment portion of the Public Hearing. Commissioner Evans stated that he has concerns about the price ranges of the units proposed in the proposed PUD. He asked how the vibrancy and critical mass of downtown is to be benefited by the proposed price ranges. Brian Judge responded that the need is for a professional housing price range for households that can afford to live in these homes and frequent the local business. Commissioner Evans asked if the phasing is negotiable. Brian Judge responded that phase one provides 99% of the public benefit by realigning the roads and utilities. Brian Judge asked for clarification of what Commissioner Evans is asking for. Commissioner Evans is asking for the developer to guarantee to the town that once a phase is undertaken that the Town will receive the public benefit that the developer is representing to finish at the completion of that phase. Commissioner Goulding stated that he feels the applicant did not fully address the principals of the East Town Center and the compliance of the proposed PUD. Commissioner Evans stated that he wanted to understand why every planning goal and policy of the Comp Plan was not addressed. Matt Gennett responded that only the applicable principals were included in the staff report as determined. Commissioner Green asked if the Commissioners could make comments without public feedback. He acknowledged that the proposed PUD meets the sun shading and Main Street alignment and that the architectural design is irrelevant at this time. Commissioner Lane asked if this is a building that we want to see in town now and later. He stated that he does not think he can see this in town now. Commissioner Green asked the other Commissioners how the lower end of the housing and commercial are attainable by locals. He also asked how the town would be obligated to assist so that locals can occupy the units affordably. Commissioner Goulding asked his fellow Commissioners to provide the applicant some feedback on what their stance is on many issues so that the applicant can adequately respond to those issues. Commissioner Evans responded that he agrees, but would like to see more information so that he can make comments that are substantive. Commissioner Evans commented that he understands the fabric of the East Town Center area and he does not feel that this project meets that fabric due to costs associated with residing in the proposed PUD. Commissioner Goulding asked the Commissioners to provide staff and the applicant with direction needed to be taken so that they can provide the applicant with feedback so that he can determine what is going to work for them. Matt Gennett stated that there are still eleven (11) other PUD Design Criteria that need to be reviewed to provide recommendation for the PUD. He suggested that the next meeting and staff report focus the discussion on those criteria. The Commissioners agreed that it would be a good approach and logical next step. Commissioner Roubos moved to table the application. Commissioner Struve seconded the motion and it passed with a 7-0 vote. IX. Other Business • Andy Hill from DOI_A will beat the next meeting to do Commissioner Training. • During the August 5"' meeting, a discussion on Financial Impacts and Fiscal Analysis with Stan Bernstein will be held. • Matt Pielsticker asked about having a greater level of detail for Sketch Design Applications. X. Adjourn Commissioner Struve moved to adjourn at 10:40. Commissioner Goulding seconded the motion and it passed 7-0. APPROVED: Chris Phil Struve Secretary