PZC Packet 120500Town of Avon
Planning & Zoning Commission
Site Tour
December 5, 2000
12:00 PM
Council Chambers
Town of Avon Municipal Building
400 Benchmark Road
I. Site Tour
Lot C, Sheraton Mountain Vista
Mock -up of Color and Materials
Meet in front of the Municipal Building.
Lunch is available to Commissioners who RSVP by 10:30 a.m.
Posted on December 1, 2000 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
• Avon Municipal Building, main lobby
• Avon Recreation Center, main lobby
• Avon / Beaver Creek Transportation Center
• City Market, main lobby
Town of Avon
Planning & Zoning Commission
Work Session
December 5, 2000
Council Chambers
Town of Avon Municipal Building
400 Benchmark Road
I. Agenda
Discussion of regular meeting agenda items.
Dinner will be served.
Posted on December 1, 2000 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
• Avon Municipal Building, main lobby
• Avon Recreation Center, main lobby
• Avon / Beaver Creek Transportation Center
• City Market, main lobby
Town of Avon
Planning & Zoning Commission
Regular Meeting
December 5, 2000
6:00 PM
Council Chambers
Town of Avon Municipal Building
400 Benchmark Road
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda
IV. Conflicts of Interest
V. Consent Agenda
A. Approval of the October 17, 2000 Planning & Zoning
Commission Meeting Minutes [Tab 1]
VI. Condition of Final Design Approval
A. Lot C, Avon at Beaver Creek
Sheraton's Mountain Vista
Mock -up of Colors and Materials
Posted on December 1, 2000 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
• Avon Municipal Building, main lobby
• Avon Recreation Center, main lobby
• Avon / Beaver Creek Transportation Center
• City Market, main lobby
VII. Concept Review
A. Lot 2, Block 4, Wildridge [Tab 2]
Project Type: Duplex - Separate Driveways
Applicant: Tab Associates
Address: 5792 Wildridge Road East
VIII. Work Session - Variance & Final Design
A. Lots 2 & 3, Avon Town Square [Tab 3]
Project Type: Town Square Lofts
Applicant: Parkhill -lvins P.C.
Owner: Jack Berga / Al Williams
Address: 90 Benchmark Road
IX. Other Business
A. Staff Approvals:
1. Lot 87, Block 1, Wildridge
2431 Old Trail Road
Site Modification - Additional Driveway
2. Lot 47, Block 1, 410 Benchmark at Beaver Creek
410 Nottingham Road
Landscape Revision - NightStar Project
3. Lot 8, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
331 Nottingham Road
Additional Parking
4. Lot 54, Block 3, Wildridge
4420 West Wildridge Road
Reroof with Asphalt Shingles
5. Tract N, Block 3, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
950 Beaver Creek Blvd.
Landscape Revisions — ERWSD Wastewater Treatment Plant
Posted on December 1, 2000 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
• Avon Municipal Building, main lobby
• Avon Recreation Center, main lobby
• Avon / Beaver Creek Transportation Center
• City Market, main lobby
6. Lot 1, Block 1, Wildridge
2000 Wildridge Road
Landscape Modification for Rocking Horse Ridge
7. Lot 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
110 Buck Creek Road, Cottonwood Resort
Seasonal Christmas Tree Lot
8. Avon Center at Beaver Creek
100 West Beaver Creek Blvd.
Revision of Site Modifications
B. Sign Permits:
1. Lot 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
90 Benchmark Road, Avon Town Square
"Wells Fargo"
X. Adjourn
Posted on December 1, 2000 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
• Avon Municipal Building, main lobby
• Avon Recreation Center, main lobby
• Avon / Beaver Creek Transportation Center
• City Market, main lobby
Town of Avon
Concept Review
November 7, 2000 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Report date November 7, 2000
Project type Concept Review of Driveway Scheme
Legal description Lot 2, Block 4, Wildridge
Current Zoning Duplex (PUD)
Address 5792 Wildridge Road East
Introduction
This Concept Review Work Session is designed to provide preliminary review of the driveway
scheme for Lot 2, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. The applicant has requested input from
Community Development, the Engineering Department, and the Planning and Zoning
Commissioners on the proposed access scheme to this lot prior to submitting an application for
final design approval.
The following is a summary of Staff concerns with this project:
1. There does not appear to be adequate evidence that the owner has difficulty with using
one access point for both sides of the duplex residence.
2. Section 4.22 (A) of the Design Standards states that "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 approved specifically 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."
3. The dual driveway causes an increase in site disturbance. This is of particular concern
since this lot is situated on a relatively large drainage basin. By constructing the
proposed two driveways, there would be an increase in fill material in the drainage areas.
4. There are many other designs for the site that would allow for better access and less
visual impact on the site. The single access proposal that was submitted does not fit the
single access criteria of not exceeding 24 feet in width. Also, the access separation and
hammerhead should be pulled back out of the 10 -foot snow storage and drainage
easement.
5. Staff does not find that an additional access point would be required for the project to
conform to the Design Standards. By the applicant's own admission, a single access
point would serve this project without any undue hardship as a result of the Design
Standard requirements.
Summary:
Staff recommends that the applicant submit a final design for this project that uses only a single
access point for both sides of the duplex. We cannot find any compelling rationale for two
access points to this lot. The applicant is not restricted in any way by topography or safety
constraints to such a degree as to warrant another access point to this project.
Town of Avon Community Development \ \finance \cd - public \p&z \staff reports\ 2000\ 110700 \newbonidyritoduplexlot2bl4wr_ doc
(970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision; PUD Development Plan
December 7, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Page 2 of 2
If you have any questions regarding this project or anything in this report, please call me at 748-
4002 or stop by the Community Development department.
Respectfull submitted,
Tambi Katieb, AICP
Town of Avon Community Development \ \fnance \cd - public \p &z \staff reports\2000\ 110700\ newbonidyritoduplexlot2bl4wr _.doc
970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
i &`'X�'
�,«
TAB Associates, Inc.
The Architectural Balance
P.O. Box 7431 Avon, CO 81620 -7431
(970) 748 -1470 (970) 748 -1471 fax
www.tabassociates.com tab @vail.net
Memo
Project: Bonidy /Rito Duplex, Lot 2, Blk. 4, Wildridge
Date: September 26, 2000
RE: Separate Driveways
FROM:
TO:
Tab Bonidy, NCARB
Ruth Borne, TOA PD
Remarks:
VIA:
949 -5749
Project No: 2017
I have attached 2 driveway schemes. Scheme A, with separate driveways, is preferred by both couples.
Although the Town has a general rule disallowing separate driveways, we believe it is the best solution for the
Town for the following reasons:
Scheme A has one garage facing the street and one turned; thereby reducing Garage door impact on the
neighborhood.
2. Due to the steep site, the east half Garage elevation is 8580' requiring 4 feet of elevation change. The
west half Garage elevation is 8576' requiring between 1 and 3 feet of elevation change depending where
the driveway entry is located. Because the driveways require different slopes, they must have separate
drive start slopes; thereby requiring a 24' wide entrance in Scheme B. This equals the same amount of
driveway frontage; therefore, Scheme A has less overall asphalt impact at the street in one location.
3. Scheme A presents more opportunity to landscape and hide driveway impact on the street.
4. Due to the site location at the very top of the hill, very few cars pass the lot; therefore the driveway
entrances have very little "traffic" implications.
5. The driveways are located on the inside corner so there is no visibility problem.
6. When cars are parked in front of the garages, Scheme A will not appear like the parking lot which
Scheme B will appear to be. Scheme A's cars will be easier to screen with landscaping than Scheme B.
7. The steep cross slope between the driveways in Scheme B will probably require some boulder walls
making it appear more "forced ".
8. The two couples prefer separate driveways; thereby reducing potential confusion and conflict.
9. Although the building is in the same location in both schemes, the building in Scheme B appears closer to
the road.
10. Scheme B looks like a duplex, where Scheme A does not.
Attachments: Scheme A— Partial Site Plan, Scheme B —Partial Site Plan
S 1 Bonidy- RitoWemoWlemo0926.doc
/
/ r
/
I
I I I
i I I 11 --
I I I I �
I -
I I
II i l O
I I �
sum
t9
_
i
0
I
I
I
m
\ JLw-
0
w
JN i
1 \\
_ � 1
0
1
I
1
� I �
I—. -1 '---7— I 1 l v
16 o
/a►I L I
ow
v
4A
•.\ 1%
lk
s, �
F
� \
/
/
� UL-All
O
i
/
/
/
=u
o � /
I
7\j
D6
►II
F
Town of Avon
Work Session
December 5, 2000 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Report date December 5, 2000
Project type Variance and Final Design for Avon Town Square Lofts
Legal description Lot 2, Phase III, Avon Town Square
Current Zoning Town Center
Address 90 Benchmark Road
Introduction
The applicant, Al Williams, is requesting a work session on a variance and final design
application for `Avon Town Square Lofts', a 21 unit residential project.
Building height proposed is for a six -story structure (80 feet). There is no commercial space
proposed in the building. The project includes one deed restricted employee housing unit.
The ground level of the project is surface parking and there is one level of underground parking.
Parking has been designed to replace the existing parking on Lot 2 and comply with the
additional parking requirements. It appears the requisite number of parking spaces have been
satisfied; however, several of the ground level parking stalls require reconfiguration. The
structural columns appear to impede the functioning of the parking spaces.
The applicant is proposing a public easement for the future overhead walkway from the
Confluence PUD project. The height of the walkway is consistent with the railroad crossing
requirements and designed to connect to Lot 61. The walkway is on the East Side of the
building on the third story with no commercial uses.
The variance seeks relief from three of the four requisite setbacks to allow stairs and elevators,
roof overhangs, overhead architectural elements such as balconies, and a screened trash area.
The following is a summary of Staff concerns with this project:
Variance
1. A variance requires the applicant to provide adequate evidence of a 'hardship'. There
does not appear to be adequate evidence that the owner is subject to a `hardship' from
the Town requirements. There is a developable portion of the property despite the
existing setback limitations. Findings required for the granting of a variance are based on
site conditions that make development under current regulations unnecessarily difficult.
Further, those conditions must be so exceptional or extraordinary that they do not apply
to properties in the same zone district.
2. Section 17.36.50 of the Town of Avon Zoning Code requires the Planning & Zoning
Commission to determine a variance is warranted for one or more of the following
reasons:
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.
Town of Avon Community Development \ \finance \cd - public \p &z \staff reports\2000 \120500 \avontownsquareii.doc
(970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Avon Town Square Lofts, Final Design and Variance Worksession
December 5, 2000 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 2 of 3
b. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to
the site of the variance that does not apply generally to other properties in the
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.
Staff does not feel that the applicant has adequately demonstrated that a variance is
warranted for this site. There are no exceptional circumstances for this property, except that
it is an unusual configuration for large -scale development. Generally, a variance is not
granted because of site constraints and limitations.
Engineering comments:
1. There are concerns of potential safety issues related to sight distance and access to the
site. It should be noted that the twenty -five foot (25') front setback on the west side of
the building is incorrectly depicted as ten feet (10'). We recommend that the design be
revised to reflect no encroachments in the building setbacks.
Town Center Design Guidelines:
1. The project has been revised with a contemporary mountain design as described in the
general design considerations for Town Center, the massing of such a large and narrow
building does not relate well to the site.
2. The setback on the west side of the lot should be twenty -five feet (25) from the right of
way. It is shown as a ten -foot (10') setback on the plans. An additional fifteen feet (15)
would create a more substantial variance application, since the habitable space of the
units would encroach into this setback.
3. It is not clear how this building relates to future plans for the Confluence site as well as
to the pedestrian mall areas. The pedestrian walkway easement is proposed within an
entirely residential project. There are no commercial or retail spaces designed to bring
the public into this project. Staff is concerned this proposed walkway is not the correct
approach for a pedestrian walkway in Town Center.
4. The main entrance to the future pedestrian walkway does not achieve the desired
pedestrian focus. The main entrance to the future pedestrian walkway is hidden and not
visible from off -site. There is a residential unit immediately adjacent to the pedestrian
walkway. Such an important pedestrian feature and future access point requires greater
street attention and fagade treatment.
5. Surface parking is discouraged under 'Area -Wide Guidelines' in the Design Guidelines.
Predominant parking functions should occur in Town structures. Additionally, it appears
the underground parking has some functional design issues.
6. Landscaping and planting appear minimal on the site. The landscaping proposed does
not accentuate or invite pedestrian focus to the future walkway area.
7. The appearance of a six -story residential building (80 feet) with surface parking on such
a narrow site does not relate to the other buildings on the project site or pay special
attention to street frontages. Though the outside fagade treatment has been revised by
the applicant, the proposed height is unacceptable on such a small and constrained site.
Town of Avon Community Development \ \finance \cd - public \p &z \staff reports\2000 \120500 \avontownsquareii.doc
970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Avon Town Square Lofts, Final Design and Variance Worksession
December 5, 2000 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Summary:
Page 3 of 3
The required variances to allow a project of this scale on this site point to the fact that the site is
highly constrained from both a functional and visual perspective.
Overall, staff cannot support this project as submitted and would ask the applicant to pursue a
project on this site of much smaller scale, higher compatibility with surrounding structures, and
sensitivity to creating an exciting pedestrian access for Town Center.
If you have any questions regarding this project or anything in this report, please call me at 748-
4002, or stop by the Community Development Department.
Respectfully submitted,
Tambi Katieb, AICP
Town of Avon Community Development \\finance \cd - public \p &z \staff reports\2000 \120500 \avontownsquareii.doc
970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
W.
CA
CD
41
00
O
CA
O
x
CA
O
C-j
-P
p
Oo
CD
O
00 0
O
N Q
0 O
0
CD
r
00
0
3
CT
0
Q
Cn
CD
O
fi
> U
r
r �
D
Z
z
Z,
G7 '
m frce
O
,o �p
u
r
I Roll
O
WON
9 Cli
0
O
�u I �
�O
0
I il
u
O �3ZppDp ii
-w_4
0 -,i i7 Oyy
-4 UOV
O
8 �
o a k. oUa
U
i
-UN---------- - - - -
- � /�
R M
ouuN
H5559; a
5559; z
NN {p tPN UNIPN NUN NNE � a
U`,11`ONUT`p YI `11NT`T 5111`1111 ii TI 11U
m N
N
n m
o
rZ o c c
0-1 o
�i OMs
Y �T
Af-
P
a
V O LJ V 7 O lJ lJ I.J V
SOMME LOF72
AM0f`9 9 C60O LOO G ADD
ARCHITECTURE• PLANNING -INTERIORS
ph 303.446.8030 fax 303.446.8031
1480 Humboldt Street
Denver
Colorado
80218
E j!2:
MON'
;MM ti W,
WIN
IBM-
1w --A
Uri, 'w
lip iLAP
W-11
LIN I11!
X71
M.,
f /18f
c
EAM.—
IWO-
a
amt
=at
E-7 I
I ,. - —�� 'may'
4k It,
b
w
C
v
z
1)
co
M
O
O
z
A
m W
C
o Z
ci
rn
M
O
O
z
IM
-c
-r
°v
z
17
rn
M
n
-I
0
z
a
I I I I I I
I
I I I I I I
I
f
g
1
Id
I I I I I
I I I I I I
I
I I I I I I
Ile
tnao�'
m ARCHITECTURE • PUNNk1C INiER10R5
0vm o Ss$ O 1480 Humboldt Street
O
c Denver
Z
ZO t °£ Colorado
Ph 303.446.8030 fax 303.446.8031 80218