PZC Minutes 05-03-2011 (2)Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes for May 3, 2011
Avon Town Council Chambers
Meetings are open to the public
Avon Municipal Building / One Lake Street
Swearing in of New Commissioners
Patty McKenny swore in new Planning and Zoning Commissioners Chris Green, Paul
Anderson, John Minervini and Jim Clancy
IL Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 5:00 pm.
III. Roll Call
All Commissioners were present.
IV. Election of Vice -Chairman
Commissioner Anderson nominated Commissioner Prince for vice-chairman.
Commissioner Green nominated Commissioner Struve for vice-chairman.
Commissioner Struve won 43, with Commissioner Clancy abstaining.
V. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda
There were no additions or amendment to the agenda.
VI. Conflicts of Interest
There were on conflicts of interest to disclose.
VII. Consent Agenda
• Approval of the April 5, 2011 Meeting Minutes
Action: Commissioner Struve moved to approve the minutes. Commissioner Prince
seconded the motion and it passed 40, with Commissioners Clancy and Minervini
abstaining.
VIII. Design Review
20 Nottingham Road Retaining Wall Modifications
Property Location: Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek / 20 Nottingham Road
Applicant: Craig Snowdon / Owner:
Description: A design modification for the retaining wall along the north side of the
property. The modification includes limiting the MSE retaining wall to the area west of the
existing boulder retaining wall.
Discussion: Jared Barnes briefly described the condition of approval and the request for
leaving the walls as currently erected. He also stated that alternatives do exist for re-
facing the veneer wall, but staff does not support the reconstruction of the wall, which
could cause further detriment to the prism of the road.
Craig Snowdon, outlined the approved keystone block wall that would connect to the stone
veneer wall. He described the difficulty with the engineered drawings and the need for
additional geomatting and structural elements. He also commented that close to 255' of
continuous keystone wall would be seen and he believes that has a negative aesthetic
impact.
1IPagc
Commissioner Struve questioned the condition and the reasoning behind the consistency
of the wall material. He stated that former Commissioner Goulding wanted to ensure that
there was sufficient stone material from the building to match the stone veneer wall.
Commissioner Prince questioned if the walls were boulders. Craig Snowdon stated that it
was a stone veneer wall.
Commissioner Clancy questioned the sandwich effect by having a stone veneer wall
surrounded by the keystone wall. He suggested if two materials were desired then a
keystone wall on the gas station site would be fitting and the subject property should use
all stone veneer wall.
Commissioner Green questioned why another wall was needed in front of the existing wall
and why the new retaining structure needed to have substantial geotech work.
Commissioner Anderson stated that the wall needed to be treated as its own wall due to
the amount of earth there.
Commissioner Green questioned why the new wall isn't a new face on the existing wall.
Craig Snowdon stated that if the board preferred the keystone look then a new veneer can
be applied, but the applicants didn't think the continuous keystone was a good fit.
Commissioner Green questioned if the new wall would have a batter? Craig Snowdon
answered it would be about 1 inch per block.
Commissioner Green questioned the height of the walls.
Commissioner Green questioned if stone was saved from the building. Craig Snowdon
said no, but the new building was approved with moss rock. Commissioner Struve
questioned if they would continue to use moss rock if given the opportunity to choose a
new rock material. Craig Snowdon responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Clancy questioned if the applicant would be open to stone veneer the entire
length of the new wall. Craig Snowdon stated that they would not be infavor of this option.
Commissioner Anderson questioned if the wall was a cut or fill wall. Craig Snowdon stated
that it was a cut wall. Commissioner Anderson stated that the wall on the proposed site
could be soil nailed so to have a continuous stone veneer.
Commissioner Struve questioned if the new wall was necessary. Craig Snowdon stated it
wasn't, but it provided a landscaping opportunity. Sherry Dorward stated that erosion, lack
of snow storage, minimized planting areas, and 2:1 slopes or greater would result if the
wall was removed.
Commisisoner Green outlined the options the PZC has for motions on this application.
Commissioner Struve stated he would prefer no wall.
Commissioner Prince questioned which option would be the preferred option. Sherry
Dorward stated that she would prefer a wall with a flat area for planting.
Jared Barnes stated that the Municipal Code does not allow slopes greater than 2:1, which
would limit the applicants options on this proposal.
Commissioner Lose preferred removing stone veneer and replaced with an MSE veneer.
He felt the proposed option would result in a disjointed look.
Commissioner Struve stated the original approval was well received from the PZC. He felt
the approval was decision to create a better site than the gas station. He stated that
approving large block walls was one of the bigger mistakes that the PZC made. He
commented that a more vigorous landscaping plan would be his preferred option.
21Pagc
IX.
Commissioner Minervini stated that he would be inclined to accept the proposal or table for
more options.
Commissioner Prince echoed Commissioner Losa's comments and make it consistent
throughout both sites. He also commented that the wall portions less than 3 feet should be
removed.
Commissioner Clancy feels proposal gets away from cohesion. He would prefer one
consistent MSE material or stone veneer for new wall.
Commissioner Anderson stated that the new MSE wall in front of the stone veneer wall is
not preferable. He would prefer original approval or a shotcrete faced wall finished with
stone veneer would be his two options.
Commissioner Green wasn't originally concerned with the stone wall breaking up the MSE
walls. He stated now he feels the MSE wall is no longer the focus. He is not in favor of a
flat veneer when the MSE walls will have a batter, but he would like to explore the idea of
simulating the batter.
Commissioner Green would like to table and give the applicant more time to study the
options. He thinks there is a better option than the one being proposed.
Craig Snowdon requested the board take action and not table the request.
Sherry Dorward stated that she would prefer additional plantings in the area to better hide
the MSE wall.
Commissioner Green questioned if a motion could be crafted to allow the construction to
occur, while the applicant and the PZC work on a solution. Jared Barnes responded that
the construction could occur, but it would be at their own risk, and any final design would
be contingent on the PZC approval.
Further dialogue ensued between the Commission to further discuss the option before
them.
Commissioner Anderson overviewed the options for the PZC to act upon.
Commissioner Struve stated that he would not vote to approve anything tonight, because
of a lack of information.
Craig Snowdon requested to withdraw the application.
Action: The application was withdrawn.
Minor Amendment
Mountain Montessori — Re -review
Property Location: Lot 22, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek / 77 Metcalf Road
Applicant. Todd Goulding, CDA -CO / Owner: Mike Pearson, BBG Holding Company
Description: Special Review Use approval modification to expand a pre-school use on the
first story of the subject property. The pre-school use will be enlarged from 1,500 square
feet servicing 20 children to 2,300 square feet servicing 40 children.
Discussion: Jared Barnes briefly described the requested expansion. He outlined the
compliance with the Development Code regarding Minor Modification review criteria,
parking, land use mix. He overviewed Resolution 10-04 which approved the SRU and also
the condition of approval that required any expansion to be reviewed by the Planning and
Zoning Commission (PZC).
Commissioner Prince questioned the approval timeframe and how that coincided with the
School year.
3 1 P a g c
Sally Vecchio stated that the Applicant is in agreement with the proposed resolution. She
further stated that the Applicant is prepared to return later this summer to initiate a Code
Text Amendment to allow the use as a Use By Right within the IC zone district.
Commissioner Struve questioned if the approval could be dated in June to better
coordinate with the school year. Jared Barnes responded that it could not, but the PZC
could choose to table the application to a later meeting and act upon the application then.
Jared Barnes further stated that the applicant would prefer and approval today.
Commissioner Struve questioned the occupancy of the second and third floor.
Commissioner Losa questioned the stacking of vehicles. Jared Barnes responded by
discussing the site photo provided in the Staff Report.
Commissioner Lose questioned if the Town Engineer reviewed.
Allison Kent stated that she had no formal presentation.
Commissioner Struve questioned the number of students today. Allison Kent responded
that there were currently 20 students per day. Commissioner Struve questioned if that
number would instantly jump to 40 students once approved. Martha Teien responded
affirmatively.
Commissioner Prince questioned the parking for special events. Martha Teien responded
that those events only occurred after regular business hours. Commissioner Prince stated
that they may exceed their allowed parking if those events occur during the day.
Sally Vecchio stated that the parking calculation is intended for the use and that not all of
the provided parking is used all of the time. Pete Petrovski stated that they would have no
issues with those conditions as their only event occurs one Thursday a month and doesn't
start until 6:00 pm.
Commissioner Green questioned the stacking issue and how it was calculated for this use.
He revised is question to ask how the stacking was managed. Martha Teien stated that
the parents never get out of the car. She stated that a staff member gets the child from the
car and walks that child to the next staff member. She stated that each drop-off/pick-up
takes about 8 minutes per child.
Action: Commissioner Struve moved to Approve Resolution 11-04 with the following
additional conditions:
Conditions #5: No special events will take place during the business day.
Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion.
Commissioner Lose questioned if there were parking spaces were deeded to the use.
Pete Petrovski stated that they were assigned, but not deeded.
The motion was approved with a 7-0 vote.
X. Special Review Use
Xcel Construction Staging
Property Location: Lot 1, Filing 1, Village at Avon Subdivision / East Beaver Creek Blvd
Applicant: Xcel Energy / Owner:
Description: The applicant is proposing to utilize two areas for temporary staging purposes.
The staging areas would support construction of a new 7.92 mile 16 -inch natural gas
transmission pipeline project taking place this summer on Hwy 6 & 24. The staging areas
would be used from May 16 through September 30, 2011 for stockpiling of pipe, metal
storage containers, limited parking, and a temporary construction office.
4 1 P a g c
Discussion: Sally Vecchio briefly described the application and requirements for SRU
review. She stated that the DRB for the Village at Avon will need to approve the above
ground improvements prior to occupation of the site.
Commissioner Struve questioned the north portion of the site and if it will be restored after
the temporary construction use is finished. He also questioned if the recycling area would
stay. He also questioned if route planning would be reviewed. Sally Vecchio responded
that it was a part of the ROW permit.
Commissioner Struve also noticed the recycle area is on the same lot and wondered if that
would be removed or moved. Sally Vecchio responded that it was to the east of the
recycling center and it would not be impacted.
Commissioner Struve questioned if the ROW permit would review and approve the routes
the trucks will use to deliver supplies. Sally Vecchio responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Minervini questioned the odor and the term "diurnal winds". Sally
responded that diurnal winds are the natural winds and that no additional mitigation is
being proposed.
Commissioner Prince questioned the process and why the Town was reviewing a SRU
application. Staff responded that outdoor storage is required to be approved by the Town
of Avon by an SRU review. Staff further stated that the Traer Creek DRB will be reviewing
any above grade improvements.
Commissioner Losa questioned mud mitigation and Town Engineer review. Staff
responded that the mud mitigation will be reviewed under the ROW permit.
John McDonald and Spence McCulley overviewed the simultaneous processes that Xcel is
working on. He stated that all parties are currently reviewing the necessary paperwork.
He sated this property is pre -disturbed and centrally located. He stated that no hazardous
materials will be located on site.
Commissioner Struve questioned how Stone Creek school was planning on moving their
modular buildings with the road being limited in traffic?
Commissioner Green questioned the storage of vehicles. John McDonald responded that
this was for company vehicles only and all employee parking will be located at the Beaver
Creek skier lots.
Commissioner Green questioned how trash will be handled. John McDonald stated on site
dumpsters will be provided.
Commissioner Clancy questioned when the Traer Creek DRB meeting will occur. He also
questioned if the project is contingent on the PZC's approval. John McDonald stated it
was. Commissioner Clancy stated that the conditions of approval would be nice to review
prior to PZC approval.
Commissioner Clancy questioned if the applicant was confident in comlpeting the project
on time. Spence McCulley responded that they are planning on finishing this summer
even if that requires additional work.
Commissioner Struve questioned if Xcel was the General Contractor? The Applicant
stated that a GC has been selected, but the contract hasn't been signed.
Commissioner Prince questioned why no public hearing was occurring tonight. Staff
responded that notice requirements weren't meet.
Commissioner Struve questioned if mailed notices would be provided. Staff responded
that the notice will be published in the paper.
Commissioner Clancy questioned the approval timeframe and questioned if it could be
shorter. Staff responded affirmatively.
5 1 P a g e
Commissioner Prince questioned if new pipe will be laid or if the old line will be replaced.
Spence McCulley responded that a new line will be laid on the north side of the roadway.
Commissioner Struve thanked the applicant for openly discussing the application.
Commissioners Anderson and Clancy stated that they have no comments.
Commissioner Prince stated that he had no comments, but would happily accept
comments on design of the fencing that he could pass to the DRB.
Commissioner Minervini questioned the timeframe and wondered if a proposal would be
brought to them. Staff stated that a timeframe will be provided to the PZC, but they can
feel free to modify the timeframe or other aspects of the SRU approval if they see fit.
Commissioner Struve asked Commissioner Prince to question the DRB on rock moving
and final location.
Commissioner Losa had no comments.
Commissioner Clancy wanted to discuss mud tracking on the ROW.
Commissioner Green stated that he had minimal comments due to other agencies review.
Action: No action is required as this was reviewed as a worksession.
XI. Code Text Amendments
A proposal to amend the code text of the Avon Development Code, specifically Section
7.24.080, Temporary uses and structures. Proposed modifications are to repeal the entire
section and replace it with new codes and processes regarding temporary uses and
structures.
Discussion: Sally Vecchio overviewed the new regulations.
Commissioner Struve questioned if City Market would need to receive a Temporary Use
Permit for their outdoor garden. Staff responded affirmatively.
Commissioner Struve questioned if the Lacrosse Tournament would be reviewed under
these regulations. Sally Vecchio stated that all events approved by the Town Council
under their Special Events review are exempt from these regulations.
Commissioner Green questioned the language of this section. He desired more clarity for
this section.
Commissioner Prince questioned what process Snowball would be reviewed under. Sally
Vecchio stated that the Town Council would approve their use in the park, but any outlying
uses of private property would be reviewed by Staff or the PZC depending on the request.
Commissioner Struve questioned the lead time on a temporary use permit. Staff stated
that it depended on the request and if a PZC review would be required.
Commissioner Minervini questioned if there was a fee associated with the review. Staff
responded affirmatively, but stated that hasn't been proposed yet and will be provided to
the Town Council for approval.
Commissioner Prince questioned why 50 people was the cut off for private events. Sally
Vecchio stated that the number 50 corresponded to the requirement for permits for events
in Nottingham Park.
Commissioner Struve questioned under 100 people went to staff. Sally stated that was
correct and anything over 100 people would go to PZC.
Commissioner Struve questioned the event in the park. Sally responded that those events
in the park and preapproved by the Town Council are not subject to these regulations as
shown in the attached Resolution.
6 1 P a g c
Commissioner Green questioned the language and it wasn't clear that Town Council
approved all special event on public property.
Action: Commissioner Prince moved to approve with the following conditions:
1. Page 2, subsection (dx1), revise to 150 persons;
2. Revise subsection (fx4) to 150 persons, strike subsection (fx5) and include
weddings of immediate property owner in subsection (fx4); and,
3. Section (g) review with Town Attorney for more clarity,
Commissioner Minervini seconded the motion.
Commissioner Clancy questioned if Xcel would have to come in under these regs.
Commissioner Green stated that he would prefer a table to get the language dialed in prior
to sending it to Council.
Commissioner Minervini questioned the lack of a mention of a fee.
The motion was approved 4-2, with Commissioner Struve abstaining.
XII. Other Business
a. Community Development Update
b. Orion 21
IX. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 pm.
APPROVAL SIGNATURES:
Phil Struve, Vice Chairperson
4C16ATVI�--
Scott Prince, Secretary
7 1 P a g c