PZC Packet 1121171 Agenda posted on Friday, November 17, 2017 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
-Avon Municipal Building, Avon Recreation Center, Avon Public Library, Town of Avon Website www.avon.org
Please call 970-748-4023 for questions.
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, November 21, 2017
One Lake Street
If you require special accommodation please contact us in advance and we will assist you. You may call David McWilliams at 970-
748-4023 or email cmcwilliams@avon.org for special requests.
--Site Tour--
I. Site Tour for Item VI. 12:00pm – 12:30pm
Summary: Site Tour of Planning Area F. Those attending can meet at 1000 East Beaver Creek
Boulevard and parking will be provided off street adjacent to the property.
--Regular Meeting--
II. Call to Order – 5:00pm
III. Roll Call
IV. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda
V. Conflicts of Interest
VI. Preliminary PUD (Major Amendment) Village at Avon PUD – CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING FROM
OCTOBER 17, 2017 MEETING
File: PUD17001
Legal Description: Lot 1, Filing 1, Village at Avon
Applicant: Harvey Robertson
Summary: Proposal to increase density in Planning Area F from 18 dwelling unit/ acre to 25
dwelling units per acre; and removal of mixed use requirements for same area. The
applicant has requested that this public hearing be continued to the December 5,
2017 PZC meeting.
VII. Special Review Use – 147 Nottingham Road - PUBLIC HEARING
File: SRU09002
Legal Description: Lot 4 Block 1 Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Applicant: Paul Bartsch
Summary: Application to extend the light duty automobile repair use in perpetuity.
VIII. Work Session
File: N/A
Legal Description: Folson Annexation
Applicant: TAB & Associates
Summary: Review revised plans for a hotel/condominium/restaurant project at the Folson
property located on US Highway 6, immediately east of the Ascent condominiums.
IX. Approval of Meeting Minutes from November 7, 2017 Meeting
2 Agenda posted on Friday, November 17, 2017 at the following public places within the Town of Avon:
-Avon Municipal Building, Avon Recreation Center, Avon Public Library, Town of Avon Website www.avon.org
Please call 970-748-4023 for questions.
X. Staff Updates
Town Owned Properties
XI. Adjourn
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Matt Pielsticker, Planning Director
Date: November 16, 2017
Agenda Topic: PUBLIC HEARING and Preliminary PUD (Major Amendment)
Village (at Avon) PUD
SUMMARY:
This file was originally noticed for the October 17, 2017 meeting. The Applicant, Harvey Robertson, has
requested another continuance to the December 5, 2017 PZC meeting. Staff recommends that PZC
open and close the Public Hearing, and then continue to the December 5, 2017 meeting.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
“I move to continue the Public Hearing for the Preliminary PUD Amendment for the Village PUD to the
December 5, 2017 regular meeting.”
APPLICATION MATERIALS:
can be found here: www.avon.org/planning
Staff Report
Case #SRU09004 Special Use Review
November 21, 2017 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting
Project type Special Use Review
Public Hearing Required Not Required
Legal Description
Zoning
Lot 4 Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Residential Duplex
Address 147 Nottingham Road
Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner
Introduction
The applicant, Paul Bartsch, is requesting an extension of the Special Review Use (SRU) Permit
to continue operating an automobile service and repair facility, originally issued in 2009. The
applicant is requesting a SRU under the category of "Automobile repair shop, minor”. The
business is operating as Avon Auto and Truck, Inc. The original approval process granted the
SRU for a period of five (years) of operation before a re-review with PZC. The application was
only now renewed due to an unrelated issue bringing attention to the property.
The subject property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (NC), is approximately .70 acres, and
is located on the south side of Nottingham Road. The building includes 6 service bays and a
caretakers’ unit above the office. When the use was approved in 2009, the use category
"Automobile service station and repair” was is a Special
Review Use permitted after approval from the Planning
and Zoning Commission. After the rewrite of the Avon
Municipal Code in 2009, the land use in not included in
the list of Allowed Uses (AMC Table 7.24-1). Because
the use predates the adoption of this code, the use is
currently considered nonconforming.
Generally, non-conforming uses are controlled by
limiting expansion and are disallowed once the use is
abandoned. Because this use is under the Special
Review Use, PZC does have the authority to terminate
the use if deemed to be inconsistent with the Review
Criteria. Staff is hesitant to add the use to the SRU
category within the NC zone district table.
Site Vicinity Map.
Review Criteria
According to section 7.16.100 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) The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and all applicable
provisions of this Development Code and applicable state and federal regulations;
The Comprehensive Plan contains the following goals related to this application:
Goal B.1 Provide a balance of land uses that offer a range of housing options, diverse
commercial and employment opportunities, inviting guest accommodations, and
high quality civic and recreational facilities that work in concert to strengthen
Avon’s identity as both a year-round residential community and as a commercial,
tourism and economic center.
Goal D.1: Ensure that there is a positive environment for small businesses.
The property is located within District 6: Gulch Area District, and there are no policies that relate
to the continuation of the current use.
Before the 2009 re-write of the AMC, the NC zone permitted automobile service stations
through the SRU process. However, this use category is not included as a special use review in
the current table.
The application is to remain a minor automobile repair shop, which uses the following definition
in the AMC: “Automobile repair shop, minor means an establishment primarily engaged in the
repair or maintenance of passenger and light truck oriented motor vehicles, trailers and similar
mechanical equipment, including brake, muffler, upholstery work, tire repair and change,
lubrication, tune ups and transmission work, car washing, detailing, polishing or the like,
provided that it is conducted within a completely enclosed building. Such use shall not include
the sale of fuel, gasoline or petroleum products.”
Pursuant to this definition, Staff recommends conditioning the approval of this use permit such
that "heavy" automobile maintenance will be strictly prohibited on the property. “Heavy”
maintenance includes such activities as engine overhauls, tire recapping, and body repainting or
repair.
2) The proposed use is consistent with the purpose and intent of the zoning district in
which it is located and any applicable use-specific standards in the Development
Code;
The Neighborhood Commercial Zone District “is established to provide for a compatible mix of
residential, small-scale neighborhood-serving commercial and civic uses. Townhouse, multi-
family units and limited commercial uses are allowed in this district. This district is intended to
be placed in a neighborhood setting providing a comfortable and safe pedestrian environment
and further enhancing the character of the neighborhood. The NC district implements the mixed-
use classification of the Avon Future Land Use Plan and should be located along a collector
roadway." The auto repair shop is consistent with the purpose and intent of the zone district. It
fills a neighborhood and town service requirement, and also caters to a more regional highway-
oriented clientele.
3) The proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses in terms of scale, site design and
operating characteristics;
The use has not been demonstrably incompatible with adjacent uses. While the auto repair use is
a relatively intensive land use, its impacts have (mostly) been confined to the site. The
Nottingham Road residential area seems to be properly buffered from this use. The area’s
residential nature is conducive to a local repair shop. The more regional Medical Office
Building and gas stations near the site also compliment the more regional nature of this use.
4) Any significant adverse impacts (including but not limited to hours of operation,
traffic generation, lighting, noise, odor, dust and other external impacts) anticipated
to result from the use will be mitigated or offset to the maximum extent practicable;
As with any service use, the control of adverse impacts such as light and noise should be
considered. In the original proposal, the applicant proposed to limit the business to repairs and
oil changes from 9am - 6pm Monday – Friday and Saturdays from 9am - 2pm. It appears that
the current hours are Monday – Friday 8am – 6pm. Staff is not concerned about this change, but
would like to reaffirm an hour limitation. Therefore, the hours as posted, and Saturday are
included as limitations within the suggested Conditions to approval below. Any changes to the
hours of operation or intensity of use would require additional review and approval by the
Planning Commission.
5) Facilities and services (including sewage and waste disposal, water, gas, electricity,
police and fire protection and roads and transportation, as applicable) will be
available to serve the subject property while maintaining adequate levels of service
for existing development; and
The use has been operational for several years and has demonstrated proper maintenance of
facilities and services during its time.
6) Adequate assurances of continuing maintenance have been provided.
The applicant has been a responsive community member. The caretaker’s unit within the
building is a good assurance that the site will remain well maintained. Because the building is
designed for its current use, it is difficult to envision any other land-use that would not require
the demolition of the existing structure.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends conditional approval of the proposed Special Review Use in order to address
some of the concerns raised in this report and from the original approval.
Recommended Motion
"I move to approve Case #09005, approving a Special Review use of a minor automobile repair
shop in perpetuity on Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, with the findings
and conditions as recommended by staff.”
Findings:
1. The Application was reviewed in accordance with AMC section 7.16.100 Special Review
Use and determined to be eligible for consideration with the applicable review criteria;
and
2. The proposed use has a negligible impact to adjacent uses and activities.
Conditions:
1. No “Junk" vehicles are permitted on the property, as defined by the Avon Municipal
Code;
2. Vehicle repairs are limited to "light" vehicle repairs. "Heavy" automobile maintenance
activities such as engine overhauls, tire recapping, and body repainting or repair are
strictly prohibited;
3. No educational use is approved on the property;
4. Hours of operation shall be limited to repairs and oil changes from 8am - 6pm Monday –
Friday and Saturdays from 9am - 2pm; and
5. This use is granted to Avon Truck and Auto, under control of Paul Bartsch. Any change
in ownership shall reapply for the Special Review Use permit.
Exhibits
Exhibit A- Excerpts from the original application
11/09/2009 17:58 9705242898 AIRPARK AUTO
Airpark Auto & Truck, Inc.
PO Box 541
Eagle Colorado, 81631
495 Airpark Drive
Gypsum, Colorado 81637
Tel: (970) 524 -2886
9 November 2009
Town of .Avon
Office of Planning and Zoning
Dear Sirs,
This letter will serve to introduce us to you as lessees of the building located at 147
Nottiia ham Rd in Avon, Colorado. This letter is accompanied by three letters of
reference.
SFCFI \JF—I
lOV 1 ®200
Commodity peveiopm
Paul Bartsch has lived in Gypsum and worked in the valley as a proprietor of an
automotive repair shop since 1999. The name of his business is Airpark Auto & Truck,
Inc. His experience in the industry extends to 1979 and he has managed multiple shops
simultaneously. He is an ASF f'-ertified Master Mechanic. He is skilled in the
management and operation of multiple shops.
His partner in business is Trish Schultheis, a resident of Edwards. Trish too has lived and
worked in the valley since 1999 establishing a franchise for carpet and upholstery
cleaning which she grew in six years to two franchises and an exclusive territory covering,
five counties. Upon selling that business in 2008 she began consulting for Paul in the
areas of finance and office management and soon after became his partner in Airpark
Auto & Trunk, Inc. Trish has five children ages 13 -22 all of whom she has raised herself
since her husband died in a plane crash in 1996 while on a missionary trip in Central
America.
Airpark Auto & Truck, Inc. has become a signature business in Gypsum garnering many
loyal and confident customers. Some of our valued fleet clients include the Colorado
State Police, Greater Eagle Fire and Protection District, National Rental Car, Coor's/
Mountain Beverage and Colorado Mountain News Media to name a few. Our gross sales
exceed the million dollar mark and we are an anchor business for many other small
businesses in the area. While we work on vehicles fox individual customers. we also
service commercial businesses with fleet repair and we even service semis which may
PAGE 04/06
Fax: (970) 524 -2898
Exhibit A
11/09/2009 17:58 9705242898 AIRPARK AUTO PAGE 05/06
break down while travelling through our beautiful valley. Typically, when this happens,
truckers are sent directly to us because not only can we actually service the large trucks
but we can get them off the interstate and hack on the goad very quickly.
Some of our clients have requested that we open a location up valley so that they might
be more easily serviced and that they would like to recommend us to their neighbors who
do not want to drive to Gypsum. Additionally, while we do offer service while you wait,
please note that we also offer puck up an o service as well as emergency repair to
community while tnaintainiray a clean and neat operation
We understand the desire of the Town of Avon to have a consistent high, TAUty long
term tenant in this building. With our backgrounds and current business stature we feel
that we are not only the most suitable but most desirable tenant one might find.
Sincerely,
Paul A. Bartsch
C
Trish Schultheis
ot
Small Enough To Know You and Laroge Enough To Serve you
Exhibit A
11/99/2009 18:13 9765242898 AIRPARK AUTO PAGE 01/02
Airpark Auto & Truck, Inc,
PO Box 541
Eagle Colorado, 81631
195 Airpark Drive
Gypsum, Colorado 81637
Tel: (970) 524 -2886
9 November 2009
Town of Avon
Office of Planning and Zoning
Dear Sirs,
Fax: (970) 5242898
By way of this Lettcr,, we Airpa& Auto & Truck, Paul Bartsch & Trish Schultheis Owners,
wish to outline a plan to work with the Town of Avon Planning & Zoning office in order to
receive your approval of a Special Use Review for our business to open Airpark Auto &
Truck- Avon at 147 Nottingham Road in Avon. Having now reached a Lcase Agreement
with the owner's of this great space, we now come to Avon P & Z to put together an SRU
that will allow our business to succeed.
Airpark Auto & Truck and Airpark Auto & Truck- Avon is a locally owned & operated
business. We have been urged to offer our dedicated clientele a more easterly location in
Eagle County. We are a community involved business that offers full service auto and ttttck
repair and emerge y working on a plan with the
e County BMU of uca on RWCakntdo Mountain College to utilize two bays of the
space for vocational technology classes, thereby offering even more public good to Town of
Avon.
With this letter we are submitting our Special Use Application. We have already identified
issues with the building daring our walk- thoupb with Willie Gray and we wish to have a
building permit issued to once again make the space safe and habitable. v VD
Our lease with the building owners will be for five years with 2 additional 5 year optio5incorporatedforapotentialoti years, of course, pending SRU approval. We wish to \4 1 eattermswhich, will allow our lease to work and if need be, "tailor made" to our unique Qeueo )situation. We are available to provide any information that you may need in consideratio p(iot`1
our request.. Gom
We loop forward to working with you and your staff overthe next fear weeks identifying th
we are indeed a good fit for the Town of Avon.
Sincerely
Paul A. Bartsch Trish Schulthei s
Small Enough To Know You and Large Enough To Serve You
Exhibit A
11/09/2009 17:58 9705"42696 AIRPARK AUTO PAGE 03/06
Attachment to Special Use Review Application
Re: Lot 4 Block 1 Benchmark at Beaver Creek
147 Nottingham Rd.
Review Criteria
Our proposed use is compatible with the requirements imposed by the zoning
code of "neighborhood commercial" and is compatible with the adjacent land
uses inasmuch as there are two petroleum stations in close proximity and there
will be a new fire station across the street. The location is very close to the
interstate which will assist the town of Avon in keeping the highway free and
clear of breakdowns which could create a traffic hazard. It is an easy location for
vehicles to be serviced quickly. It conforms to the Town of Avon Comprehensive
plan because while this type of business is needed, it is proposed in an area
where it will serve the public well but be away from areas where it would not be
so readily received. It will end the perceptions imposed by a vacant building and
actually bring new life to the surrounding area. Residents and commercial
businesses will now be able to have their vehicles serviced in close proximity to
their place of business..
Applicant Applica
n
C®0mp\tiI
Exhibit A
Staff Report
SPECIAL REVIEW USE VON
C O L O R A D O
December 1, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting
Report date November 23, 2009
Project type Special Review Use (SRU) Permit
Legal description Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Subdivision
Zoning Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
Introduction
The applicants, Paul Bartsch & Trish Shultheis, are requesting a Special Review Use
SRU) Permit to operate an automobile service and repair facility. The business would
be an extension of their current business, Airpark Auto and Truck, Inc., which currently
operates out of Gypsum. This application is use specific and contemplates some minor
improvements to the site and building; therefore, Staff would like to focus this review
exclusively on the appropriateness of the use and review minor design modifications
with a separate design review application.
The subject property is approximately .70 acres and is located on the south side of
Nottingham Road. The existing building includes 6 service bays and a caretakers unit
above the office. The property formerly operated as Golden Eagle Auto as an approved
SRU for automobile maintenance and oil and lube. According to the Town records the
property was both inactive and in violation (storage of junk vehicles) since November
2005. Consequently, the previously approved SRU is no longer valid.
The property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (NC), which according to the purpose
statement for that zone is intended to "provide sites for commercial facilities and
services for the principal benefit of residents of the community and also to highway -
oriented convenience commercial needs." Because the proposed land use in not
included in the list of Allowed Uses (Exhibit B), the applicant is requesting a SRU under
the category of "Automobile service station and repair," which is a Special Review Use
permitted in this Zone District.
This application is a noticed public hearing with written notice provided to property
owners within 300' of the subject property. There was one letter of objection received
by staff and this letter is attached to this report as Exhibit D.
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:
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 949 -4280 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Exhibit A
Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at heaver Creek
December 1, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting 2 of 5
1. Whether the proposed use otherwise complies with all requirements imposed
by the zoning code.
The NC zone permits "Automobile service station and repair" through an approved
SRU process. There will be oil and lube service available, as well as general "light"
automobile repairs. According to the applicant all heavy and /or lengthy repairs will
take place in their current Gypsum facility.
Below is the current definition of automobile service station and repair:
17.08.080 Automobile service station and repair. "Automobile service
station and repair" means any premises where gasoline and /or other
petroleum products are sold and /or light maintenance activities such as
engine tune -ups, lubrication and minor repairs are conducted; but shall not
include premises where heavy automobile maintenance activities such as
engine overhauls, tire recapping, and body repainting or repair are conducted.
Ord. 91 -10 §1(part))."
Pursuant to this definition, Staff recommends conditioning the approval of this use
permit such that "heavy" automobile maintenance will be strictly prohibited on the
property. The property may need to be brought into conformance with the Dark Sky
Ordinance. The applicant has committed to addressing all building code and lighting
issues no later than January 2010. Minor landscaping and building improvements
limited to painting), would take place in the spring of 2010.
2. Whether the proposed use is in conformance with the Town Comprehensive
Plan.
The areas within the Comprehensive Plan that offer policy direction relative to the
proposed land use are the Future Land Use Plan, the District #13 special area
policies, and the General Goals and Policies of the Plan.
The Future Land Use Map designates the property as Neighborhood Commercial.
The definition of Neighborhood Commercial is slightly different than the zoning
definition of neighborhood commercial in terms of preferred land uses. The
Comprehensive Plan appears to be more descriptive in the intended uses that
include "neighborhood focused retail and services (such as markets, childcare,
restaurants, and cafe's) that are conveniently located and connected to surrounding
residential uses." Based on these uses, the application is inconsistent in terms of
land use and intensity. However, the building is suited exclusively for automotive
repair and service uses and these uses appear to be appropriate for the building at
this time
The subject property is located within District 13: Nottingham Road Commercial
District (Exhibit C). These special area policies don't address this type of land use
other than to state that uses "should not compete with the Town Center in terms of
size of buildings or intensity of development." This proposed use should not have
any detrimental effect on the Town Center district.
The planning principles outlined in District 13 should be considered with this review,
including the following:
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Exhibit A
Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at tseaver Creek
December 1, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 3 of 5
Require landscape setbacks and internal landscaping of parking lots
Screen all equipment and storage areas from view
Limit access points on Nottingham Road to simplify traffic movements
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.
Compatibility with existing and planned adjacent residential properties is Staff's
primary consideration with this land use application. The site design, which remains
largely unchanged, and the appearance of these improvements should be taken into
account. While the appearance of the property is of utmost importance to the
successfulness of this permit, the focus of this review is on the automobile service
use and any design review would be forwarded to a future application.
Part of this application contemplates a potential for public classes on site (i.e. how to
change a flat tire). Due to the lack of information on this aspect of the business
operation, Staff would defer any review of educational use to a future date if the
applicant deems this use feasible on the property.
The proposed automotive repair use is a relatively intensive land use, and its
impacts must be carefully reviewed. The existing residential uses several hundred
feet to the west and planned residential uses to the north coupled with the proximity
to the Buck Creek drainage makes this a unique location for any land -use. The
interstate highway and the appearance of the property from both the interstate and
Nottingham Road must be taken into consideration.
Understanding that the building is designed for a single purpose - automobile repair,
and the site has historically been used for automobile repair, it is difficult to
anticipate any other land -use being proposed that would not require the demolition
of the existing structure. As with any service use, the control of adverse impacts
such as light and noise should be considered.
The applicant proposes to limit the business to repairs and oil changes from 8am —
6pm Monday — Friday. There would be oil changes and light repair work on
Saturdays from 9am — 2pm. Any changes to the hours of operation or intensity of
use would require additional review and approval by the Planning Commission.
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.
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.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Exhibit A
Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
December 1, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 4 of 5
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.
It is difficult to find a clear public benefit with this application that the current
entitlements cannot achieve. However, given that this specific use ( "Automobile
service station and repair) is contemplated and is enumerated as a permitted
Special Review Use in the Zoning Code, Staff is of the opinion that this review
criteria is not applicable since there is no proposed change to the zoning
entitlements. Rather, this would be the employment of a specified land -use in
the Zoning Code.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends CONDITIONAL APPROVAL of the proposed Special Review Use
permit for vehicle service and light repair on Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Subdivision.
Recommended Motion
I move to approve Resolution 09 -16 thereby APPROVING the applicants request to
operate a vehicle service and repair facility on Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver
Creek Subdivision, with the following findings of fact:
1. The mandatory review criteria have been considered, and the use is
compatible with adjacent properties.
2. All Zoning Code requirements have been met with this proposal.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. This permit is valid for a period of five (5) years, at which time the permit
will be re- reviewed.
2. No "Junk" vehicles are permitted on the property, as defined by the Avon
Municipal Code.
3. Vehicle repairs are limited to "light" vehicle repairs. "Heavy" automobile
maintenance activities such as engine overhauls, tire recapping, and body
repainting or repair are strictly prohibited.
4. The use can commence once the building improvements are installed and
satisfactorily inspected by the Chief Building Official.
5. A separate Minor Design application will be submitted prior to the
commencement of this use. The application will include all landscaping
and building design improvements — including additional screening from
Interstate 70 — as expressed in the Comprehensive Plan. All
improvements will be complete no later than May, 2010.
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Exhibit A
Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
December 1, 2009 Planning & Zoning Commission meeting Page 5 of 5
6. No educational use is approved on the property.
7. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material
representations made by the applicant or applicant representatives in this
application and in public hearings shall be adhered to and considered
binding conditions of approval.
If you have any questions regarding this or any other project or community development
issue, please call me at 748 -4009, or stop by the Community Development Department.
Respectfully submitted,
Pie ' er
Planner II
Exhibits
Exhibit A- Application Materials
Exhibit B- Municipal Code Section 17.20.040
Exhibit C- Excerpt from Comp Plan - District 13
Exhibit D- Public Comment
Exhibit E- Resolution 09 -16 (draft)
Nottingham Road Commercial District
Lot 4 Block 1 BMBC
Town of Avon Community Development (970) 748 -4030 Fax (970) 949 -5749
Res aer:,. S::ea_s
Exhibit A
i
movie
lip
Jbi
1 ' 1S` 11rt 11 i>:
1 /
Ad r •
1
A
Exhibit A
EXHIBIT E
HEART ofthe VALLEY
TOWN OF AVON . _p
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION V 0 NRESOLUTIONNO. 09 -16
C O L O R A D O
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL REVIEW USE PERMIT
TO PERMIT AUTOMOBILE SERVICE AND LIGHT REPAIR USES
ON LOT 4, BLOCK 1, BENCHMARK AT BEAVER CREEK
SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO
WHEREAS, Paul Bartsch & Trish Shultheis, have requested a Special Review Use
SRU) Permit to operate a vehicle service and repair facility; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held by the Planning & Zoning Commission of
the Town of Avon on December 1, 2009, 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
application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of Avon has considered the
following review considerations:
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.
D. Whether the proposed use provides evidence of compliance with
the Public Purpose provisions outlined in the Avon Municipal Code
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning & Zoning Commission of the
Town of Avon, Colorado, hereby conditionally approves a special review use permit to
operate a vehicle service and repair facility; as stipulated in Title 17, of the Avon
Exhibit A
Municipal Code on Lot 4, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Town of
Avon, Eagle County, Colorado.
WITH THE FOLLOWING FINDING:
1. The mandatory review criteria have been considered, and the use is compatible
with adjacent properties.
2. All Zoning Code requirements have been met with this proposal.
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. This permit is valid for a period of five (5) years, at which time the permit will be
re- reviewed.
2. No "Junk" vehicles are permitted on the property, as defined by the Avon
Municipal Code.
3. Vehicle repairs are limited to "light" vehicle repairs, including engine tune -ups,
lubrication and minor repairs. "Heavy" automobile maintenance activities such as
engine overhauls, tire recapping, and body repainting or repair are strictly
prohibited.
4. The use can commence once the building improvements are installed and
satisfactorily inspected by the Avon Chief Building Official.
5. A separate Minor Design application will be approved prior to the issuance of a
building permit. The application will include all landscaping and building design
improvements — including additional screening from Interstate 70.
6. No educational use is permitted on the property.
7. Except as otherwise modified by this permit approval, all material
representations made by the applicant or applicant representatives in this
application and in public hearings shall be adhered to and considered binding
conditions of approval.
Adopted this 1,st Day of Deceriiber, 2009
Signed:
Date:
Todd Goulding, Chairperson
i
Att
Date:
Phil Struve, Secretary
Exhibit A
November 21, 2017 PZC Work Session No. 2 Colorado World Resorts PUD
PAGE 1 OF 4
To: Planning and Zoning Commission
From: Matt Pielsticker, AICP, Planning Director
Meeting Date: November 21, 2017
Agenda Topic: Work Session No.2–Colorado World Resorts
Introduction
Representatives from the development team will be in attendance for a work session concerning the
hotel/condominium project on the Folson Annexation property. This meeting follows a September 19,
2017 introductory work session with Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC). The purpose of Tuesday’s
work session is to provide the PZC with an update on the progression of the project, and follow-up on
specific comments voiced at the September meeting. A narrative, site plans, floor plans, sections, and
modeling are attached to this report.
The applicant is seeking direction on building height, as well as providing the PZC with the opportunity
to review the plans and potential rezoning process prior to submitting a live application. We urge PZC
to consider what additional submittal items (if any) would be of assistance to fully review the application
if it is pursued.
When evaluating the submitted plans and direction the applicant is heading, It is important to consider
1) the PUD eligibility requirements; and 2) the PUD review Criteria (outlined in Exhibit A). Questions
that would be helpful to staff and the applicant to address at Tuesday’s hearing include:
1) Is the Town Center (TC) the appropriate underlying Zone District for the property? (see Exhibit
A for purpose and intent of TC zone District) and does the project implemented the goals of this
mixed-use classification?
2) Does the draft proposal meet PUD eligibility requirements? (see Exhibit A and Applicant’s
narrative Exhibit B)
3) Are the changes to the building massing and height acceptable?
4) Is the architectural direction appropriate (i.e. “front door experience”) for the site?
5) Are the public benefits commensurate with the development proposal and meeting PUD
eligibility requirements?
6) Is parking reduction sufficient for the hotel portion of project? Is a parking study necessary for
the multiplier factor proposed?
7) Are there any additional submittal requirements that would be helpful for PZC in reviewing a
formal application?
November 21, 2017 PZC Work Session No. 2 Colorado World Resorts PUD
PAGE 2 OF 4
Process
The project timeline, below, would be required to zone and approve the design of the project. Table
7.20-9 is also included for reference of the typical dimensions in the Town Center District. The PUD
overlay would then be necessary to increase the allowed height from the zoning requirement, as well
as variations to the minimum parking. Below is abbreviated process:
• Rezoning to Town Center (TC), with concurrent Preliminary PUD overlay Application
o PZC recommendation to Council
o Council final action on Rezoning with Ordinance
• Final PUD overlay Application
o PZC recommendation to Council
o Council final action on PUD with Ordinance
• Major Development Plan & Design Review – concurrent with, or following Final PUD
o PZC review and Final Action
Exhibits
A –Development Code Excerpts for Town Center, PUD
B – Written Project Description, Dated November 21, 2017
C – Development Plan Drawings
November 21, 2017 PZC Work Session No. 2 Colorado World Resorts PUD
PAGE 3 OF 4
Exhibit A
Section 7.20.080(c) Town Center
Town Center (TC). The TC district is intended to provide sites for a variety of uses such as hotels,
commercial establishments, offices and some residential uses in a predominately pedestrian
environment. The Town Center should be distinguished from other areas in the Town and serve as the
focal point for social, business, and cultural activities. This district contains the highest intensity of uses
and should serve as the major transit destination as well as provide high levels of pedestrian
accessibility. The TC district implements the mixed-use classification of the Avon Future Land Use Plan.
Table 7.20-9 Dimensions for the Town Center District
Min.
Lot
Size
(acres
or sq.
ft.)
Min.
Lot
Width
(feet)
Max. Lot
Coverage
(%)
Min.
Landscape
Area (%)
Min.
Front
Setback
(feet)
Min.
Side
Setback
(feet)
Min.
Rear
Setback
(feet)
Max.
Building
Height
(feet)
n/a n/a 50 [5] 20 0 [1, 4] 7.5 [2] 10 [3] 80
[1] Infill development shall match the smallest setback of existing, adjacent
structures.
[2] TC abutting a residential district shall match the side yard setback standards
of that district.
[3] When abutting a public street, alley or public right-of-way. The rear setback
for TC abutting a residential district shall be 20 feet, regardless of the location of
any street, alley or ROW.
[4] Nonresidential development that incorporates public space such as a plaza or
courtyard into the building design may increase the front setback by up to 20 feet
to accommodate that area up to 40% of the front building line.
[5] May be increased to 80% if employee housing mitigation is provided in
accordance with Section 7.20.100.
Section 7.16.060(b), PUD Eligibility Criteria
(1) Property Eligible. All properties within the Town of Avon are eligible to apply for PUD approval.
November 21, 2017 PZC Work Session No. 2 Colorado World Resorts PUD
PAGE 4 OF 4
(2) Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Avon
Comprehensive Plan.
(3) Consistent with PUD Intent. The proposed development shall be consistent with the intent and spirit
of the PUD purpose statement in §7.16.060(a).
(4) Compatibility with Existing Uses. The proposed development shall not impede the continued use or
development of surrounding properties for uses that are permitted in the Development Code or
planned for in the Avon Comprehensive Plan.
(5) Public Benefit. A recognizable and material benefit will be realized by both the future residents and
the Town as a whole through the establishment of a PUD, where such benefit would otherwise be
infeasible or unlikely.
(6) Preservation of Site Features. Long-term conservation of natural, historical, architectural, or other
significant features or open space will be achieved, where such features would otherwise be destroyed
or degraded by development as permitted by the underlying zoning district.
(7) Sufficient Land Area for Proposed Uses. Sufficient land area has been provided to comply with all
applicable regulations of the Development Code, to adequately serve the needs of all permitted uses in
the PUD projects, and to ensure compatibility between uses and the surrounding neighborhood.
Section 7.16.060(e)(4), PUD Review Criteria
(i) The PUD addresses a unique situation, confers a substantial benefit to the Town, and/or incorporates
creative site design such that it achieves the purposes of this Development Code and represents an
improvement in quality over what could have been accomplished through strict application of the
otherwise applicable district or development standards. Such improvements in quality may include, but
are not limited to: improvements in open space provision and access; environmental protection;
tree/vegetation preservation; efficient provision of streets, roads, and other utilities and services; or
increased choice of living and housing environments.
(ii) The PUD rezoning will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare;
(iii) The PUD rezoning is consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan, the purposes of this
Development Code, and the eligibility criteria outlined in §7.16.060(b);
(iv) Facilities and services (including roads and transportation, water, gas, electric, police and fire
protection, and sewage and waste disposal, as applicable) will be available to serve the subject property
while maintaining adequate levels of service to existing development;
(v) Compared to the underlying zoning, the PUD rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse
impacts upon the natural environment, including air, water, noise, storm water management, wildlife,
and vegetation, or such impacts will be substantially mitigated;
(vi) Compared to the underlying zoning, the PUD rezoning is not likely to result in significant adverse
impacts upon other property in the vicinity of the subject tract; and
(vii) Future uses on the subject tract will be compatible in scale with uses or potential future uses on
other properties in the vicinity of the subject tract.
Colorado West Resorts, LLC TAB Associates, Inc.
Colorado World Resorts PUD
Planning and Zoning
Work Session
Project Description
November 21, 2017
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
1 | Page
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 3 PROJECT TEAM
Page 4 Project Overview and Process
Page 5 Town Center Zoning – PUD Differences
Page 6 Building Mass
Page 7 Building Height
Page 8 Front Door Experience
Page 9 Amenities
Fire Egress
Page 10 Traffic and Parking
Page 11 Connectivity
Page 12 Value Add to Town
Page 14 Findings and Conclusions
Page 15 DESIGN STANDARDS
PUD Information
Public Benefit Criteria
Page 16 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Introduction
Existing Conditions
Existing Zoning and Land Use
Town Center – Dimensions Chart
Page 18 DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Project Phasing
Page 19 Access and Circulation
Employees
Page 20 Parking Analysis
Shuttle Service
Open Space
Geological Study
APPENDIX
Comparison Chart of example projects – Height, Massing, Density, Disturbance.
Possible Square Footage and Program Information – numbers may vary from PUD
application. PUD application supersedes.
Traffic Report
Possible November Presentation (Provided for reference only. Some items may change or
be revised.)
Exhibit B
2 | Page
PROJECT TEAM
Owner
Colorado World Resorts, LLC
6460 S. Quebec St
Building 5
Centennial, CO 80111
Colorado World Resorts LLC and its predecessor companies have been family owned and operated in
Denver, CO for over 25 years. Since founding, the company has built, remodeled and operated 17 branded
hotels in the Denver area (3 new and 14 remodeled). Including other members of the team over 60 hotels
have been owned and/or operated in the Denver market area. The company is an approved Hilton Hotel
brand builder and operator. Brands built and operated include Ramada, Days Inn, Hampton Inn and Suites,
Fairfield Inn and Suites, Microtel, Wingate, Clarion and Super 8, IHG Hotels and independently branded
hotels.
The company also has roots as a European custom home builder. They have built over 500 homes (ranging
from 3,000s.f. - 40,000 s.f.) in the Denver area and has also completed over 2 million square feet of home
and commercial remodeling. This combined with the teams avid love of skiing, mountaineering, golf,
outdoor sports and the Vail Beaver Creek area, will result in a beautifully designed and meticulously
operated property over the long term.
Architect
TAB Associates, Inc.
56 Edwards Village Blvd
Suite 210
Edwards, CO 81632
Tab Bonidy, President
Greg Macik, Principal
Civil Engineering
Alpine Engineering, Inc.
P.O. Box 97
Edwards, CO 81632
(970) 926-3373
(970) 926-3390 fax
Geology
Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical
5020 Road 154
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
(970) 945-7988
(970) 945-8454 fax
Wetlands
Western Ecological Resource
711 Walnut Street
Boulder, CO 80302
(303) 449-9009
(303) 449-9038 fax
Traffic
LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc.
1889 York Street
Denver, CO 80206
(303) 333-1105
(303) 333-1107 fax
Environmental Impact Report
Watershed Environmental Consultants, Inc.
P.O. Box 4618
Eagle, CO 81631
(970) 328-4364
(970) 328-4364 fax
Exhibit B
3 | Page
Project Overview and Process
The property is commonly known as the Folson property. The 21.52 acres site is contiguous to and east of
the Accent Development which is directly east of the Beaver Creek Roundabout.
Colorado World Resorts, LLC is proposing a Hotel/Condominium complex located in the lower west portion
of the property. The project is being proposed as a single phase project.
The project site does begin to rise steeply after the rather flat front portion of the site. We have concentrated
the development on the lower flat section of the site to avoid as much as possible the steep slopes of the
site.
Condominiums will be for sale units.
Hotel portion will be a boutique Hotel without a major brand attachment at this time.
TAB Associates, Inc. began working with a developer on this site in 2006. By January of 2008 we were
close to an approval prior to economic issues and Owner withdraw from the project. Since 2008 we have
had at least six different developers approach us to help research and purse a new development. Projects
similar to this one, hotels, commercial and etc have been discussed. In most cases the potential developer
withdrew due to the complexity of the site and limited site area in relationship to potential salable square
footage.
Colorado World Resorts, LLC approached us in July of this year to potentially resurrect the project that was
abandoned in 2008. We do believe the process we went through in 2006 and 2007 developed a project that
met and still meets the Town Code.
We purposefully followed the previous process so as to build upon all the work and decision making
previously done and agreed upon, and this is a foundational premise so as to not waste building or P&Z
time. As we describe below we were down to one last item of building height.
As you will learn we have carefully reviewed the new Avon Town Code, Comprehensive Plan and Strategic
Plan to assure we meet the current plans and Code.
Our goal is to commence TOA P&Z meetings in December for the Preliminary PUD Application process.
We are prepared to provide additional information as seen fit by the Town of Avon for this PUD application.
Proposed Use Description
Colorado World Resorts, LLC is proposing a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay of Town Center
Zoning pursuant to the Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan and direction received from the Planning Staff.
We will be asking for various deviations from the Town Center Zoning and Town Code.
Building Height
Parking Requirements
The following charts are a point by point response to what we heard during our September work session.
Items we heard that were issues or items which needed further explanation and information:
Town Center Zoning/ PUD Differences
Building Mass Building Height
Front Door Experience
Amenities
Traffic and Parking
Connectivity
Value Add to Town
Exhibit B
4 | Page
Town Center Zoning/ PUD Differences
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Is the site Residential?
Should we consider this a
Grandfathered, continuation
of 2007 applications?
Is the project appropriate for
site and Avon?
Some Favored the project on
the site.
Base Camp- Ex PUD Zoning.
Residential – It is part of a transitional zone from condo to medium
density
o Continue to review as PUD
o Town Center Comparison
o Creates transitional zone considering Eagle Vail medium
density is over 350 yards away and separated by large
mountain.
Height (TC-80 feet) – (PUD-94’)
o Stepped VS Flat
o Average TC Height – 93’-3” (5 Studied)
o We will be restricted to 45% of building. TC does not limit.
Could build 80 feet across project. We are restricting our
project more than other projects in Town.
Increased Setbacks
o Front – (TC-0) – (PUD-40’)
o Side – (TC-7.5’) – (PUD-40’)
o PUD is More restrictive than TC projects.
Site Coverage (TC-50%) – (PUD-50%)
o 4.7% entire site.
o 35.5% of north portion only.
o Average TC coverage – 80% (5 Studied)
o No comparison. Disturbance is far less than any other
project in Avon.
Goal of PUD standards are to create the transition wanted from the ascent and put restrictions on the
property which are much more restrictive than TC guidelines.
When comparing the TC standards the current TC buildings do not even meet those standards.
We are only asking for the height and in addition, burden the project with other items beyond the TC.
Exhibit B
5 | Page
Building Mass
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Move mass east
Shift lower floor to create
more stepping
Correct disturbance numbers
Perspective showing
massing comparison
Small building on east side
Stepped west portion and shifted height to middle of building
Moved garage entry
Lowered building levels 5 feet
o Overall height to 94 feet.
Disturbance - 4.7% entire site
Added more massing examples
o Examples and comparisons show we are in the average
across the Town.
Stepped building to lower height zone on west
Discussing small pavilion building for trail usage
See also the appendix for Town of Avon Comparison Chart. Chart shows the comparison of a number of
development items for 5 existing structures in the Town.
Square Footage
Units
Density
Footprint
Disturbance
Height
Parking
Exhibit B
6 | Page
Building Height
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Show Height Comparisons to
other buildings
Comparison showing year
built, parking, square footages
of disturbance and footprint,
density
Height not an issue vs
massing
Precedent Set in TC.
Is it a Transitional Property?
Lowered height from 104’ to 94’
We have kept the stepping limitations
Comparisons are shown in new images as well as noted in
Comparison Chart in Appendix.
Compatible with Avon structures in height and massing
Can argue fits better against hill than in middle of town
Transitions from Ascent to hillside to Eagle-Vail
We are asking for a restricted stepped building height as outlined further in this description. This would put
restrictions in the PUD which would allow us to only achieve certain heights as percentages of the building
length. This would insure a stepped building height.
Town Center building height is noted as 80 feet but the Avon Center, Sheraton and Westin are above 90
feet.
We maintain the building mass becomes a part of the massive mountain that creates the site. It blends
more appropriately versus a longer lower building.
We have pushed the building further back up the hill to move it further from the road and thus give more
relief.
We feel the building mass creates an extension of the existing developments and does not create a canyon
effect.
We could achieve a lower building height by creating a similar situation as the Accent by digging out the
grade and starting the building lower on the site. We chose to work with the site instead of digging it out.
We still feel the building height proposed is the best compromise to address the site constraints as well as
economic constraints.
a) Proposed 104 foot height is 24 feet higher than Accent as measured per Town Code.
i) This development should not be held to the fact the Accent removed grade to achieve a lower
main level.
Exhibit B
7 | Page
Front Door Experience
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Entry Not so Massive
Decks and overlooks
Green Space in Front-
Reduce Asphalt
What are retaining walls?
Pedestrian Perspective
South Façade more attractive
Parking Lot Lighting
May items are more for the Design Review Stage – still working on
Reduced entry elements
Reduce asphalt and created more green space to the west.
o Fire Access confirmed but reduced in scale and paving
material. Grass Crete.
o Will consider and use Landscape Architecture for Mitigation
o Parking discussion – Plans show possible full code parking
to east. Can be deleted if parking reduction is acceptable.
More images showing stone veneer retaining walls. Walls are
reduced at the street frontage.
o More consideration for the street level - Pedestrian Images
Parking Lot lighting – Night sky compliant. Reduce tall lights against
Hwy 6, address from farther back in lot.
Exhibit B
8 | Page
Amenities
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Employee Housing a must.
Mixed use necessary?
4 Units
o Deed restricted housing on site.
o Or off site
Feel some Commercial can be a further draw to site and amenity
for users on site.
Developed a possible Trail System
o Conservation Easement TBD
Bike Share program researched. To be provided on site.
Sustainable Design
o Shuttle, Design, Zero Waste
Fire Egress
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Other design options?
Follow up with Fire
Department- Update?
Site Plan
o A Option – drive through
There is an Easement in place on the ascent
property. Would need to adjust south for road
alignment.
Preferred option by FD.
o B Option – hammer head no access road. Created more
wider disturbance.
Discussed with FD – Fire access to west portion of building is
required.
o Building can not be reached from Hwy 6.
Exhibit B
9 | Page
Traffic and Parking
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
CDOT Concerns
Show Comparisons
How does Shuttle Service
work?
Correct Employee Count
Employee Parking Plan
Not in favor of parking
reductions
Updated traffic study
o 20% reduction for Shuttle
o Initial discussion with CDOT. CDOT and TOA still need to
review and comment.
o Site plan shows suggested turn lanes and Hwy 6
improvements.
How does shuttle service work, benefits
o Safety
o High Level of service
o 3 Shuttles (Local, Eagle, Denver)
24 hour operation
Employees
o 47 on site
o Parking Plan
Use of shuttle of local routes
On bus route
Parking Reduction
o 20% Standard CDOT reduction (for traffic) with use of
shuttle
o 9% overall reduction
o July 2017 – Avon Study (suggestions and findings)
15% 2017 Avon Study – Mixed Use
2017 Avon Historic Study - .8-.94 parking used per
unit.
Suggested parking option - 1.25 per unit – Covers
all uses on site. We would only need to add 10
more spots to meet this requirement.
Exhibit B
10 | Page
Connectivity
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Sidewalk extents
Bike route
What facilitates pedestrian
use?
Who owns conservations
easement and trail system?
It is what it is?
Sidewalk extends to bus drop off
o Topography interrupts
o Extension of sidewalk system to bus stop and possible trail
system
Extension, trail and uses facilitates
Ownership of Easement still TBD
o Eagle Valley Land Trust?
o On site Ownership?
o Other
It is what it is?
o Topography – extends to bus stop
o Building is end of path, extension of Trail
Exhibit B
11 | Page
Value Add to Town
P& Z Comments – 09/19/17 Response
Room Occupancy need?
Open Space Plan
Need for Middle Upper Class Rooms
Continued growth since 2010.
Westin, BG Ritz, Park Hyatt, Four Seasons
o Average Daily Rate (ADR) increase 37%
o Revenue Per Available Room(RevPAR) increase 57%
o Room Demand up 15%
o 61% average occupancy (12 month)
o 90%‐100% during peak
o 2016 revenue up 58%
Trail – Proposed hiking and biking trail
o Proposed pavilion (information building) at trail head
16+ acres open conservation easement
Additional 2+ acres not developed on building lot
The Vail Valley area has a well‐established lodging market that offers a wide range of product. At the
higher end of the range are luxury projects that have good locations relative to skiing and the resort core
areas, and usually a sizable amount of meeting space. The latter is important for supporting occupancy
during the summer and off‐seasons, particularly for larger properties.
Lodging market conditions have been improving since 2010. The state economy is expected to continue to
grow, and lodging demand year‐round is expected to increase, and Vail‐Beaver Creek are expected to
continue to be a world leader.
Based on a proprietary STR report produced on October 6, 2017 for 4 key properties in the area (Westin
Riverfront, Ritz‐Carlton Bachelor Gulch, Park Hyatt Beaver Creek, and Four Seasons Resort Vail, taken as a
group from 2011 through August 2017):
ADR ($) has increased from $341.05 to $467.11, up 37%;
RevPAR has increased from $182.36 to $286.44, up 57%;
Supply of rooms is essentially flat and demand for rooms is up 15% and trailing 12 month average
occupancy is 61%, with particular days of the week during peak season at 90‐100% occupancy.
Revenue ($) for the group was $48.6mm in 2011, and $76.7mm in 2016 (up 58%). 2017 YTD is running
approximately $2mm ahead of 2016 pace.
These are very strong ADR’s with very stable resort occupancy in a top world renown resort community.
Exhibit B
12 | Page
Conditions are perfect for developing a property that is positioned on the mountain side of Route 6,
positioned as middle upper class luxury segment, just below the upper upper class luxury segment
(Westin) and luxury class segment (Ritz, Park Hyatt and Four Seasons).
Volume of residential sales has gradually increased with steady improvement in prices per square foot.
Exhibit B
13 | Page
Findings and Conclusions
We are disturbing approximately 4.7 acres of the entire site including buildings and all site walls.
Over 16 acres dedicated as conservation easement. Trail system extension.
The new access will provide better emergency access to our site, as well as The Accent.
The plan provides a continuation of pedestrian access along the south side of U.S. Highway 6 and
access to the site above via a hiking trail system. Safer public transit access.
Most of the parking is structured with shuttle service.
Massing of the building is appropriate with the slope of the land. We are building on the flatter section
of the land with limited disturbance of the upper slope.
The building will provide additional high quality residences and hotel units to the Town of Avon.
The use is appropriate to the Town of Avon Code.
Sustainable building design and sustainable building operations.
The development will create an enhanced visual impact for the east entry to Avon in regards to
Comprehensive goals to promote the resort image.
Long-term economic gains via transfer taxes for the Town through first sales and re-sale of the units
will continue.
The hotel, restaurant and limited commercial will also provide a tax source.
Additional information and potential Design standards are provided below for consideration.
Exhibit B
14 | Page
DESIGN STANDARDS
PUD Information
Review for PUD Application
The Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council shall consider the following criteria as the
basis for a recommendation or decision to rezone a property to PUD overlay, approve a preliminary
PUD plan or process a PUD amendment:
(i) The PUD addresses a unique situation, confers a substantial benefit to the Town and/or
incorporates creative site design such that it achieves the purposes of this Development Code and
represents an improvement in quality over what could have been accomplished through strict
application of the otherwise applicable district or development standards. Such improvements in
quality may include, but are not limited to: improvements in open space provision and access;
environmental protection; tree/ vegetation preservation; efficient provision of streets, roads and
other utilities and services; or increased choice of living and housing environments.
1- 16 acres of dedicated conservation easement.
2- Improved pedestrian access along the south side of Hwy 6.
3- Preservation of natural resources.
4- Hwy 6 CDOT upgrades.
5- Additional residential and short term rental options.
(ii) The PUD rezoning will promote the public health, safety and general welfare;
1- Extension of Town of Avon trail system.
2- Sustainable building design and sustainable building operations.
3- Safer public transit access.
Public Benefit Criteria
(1) The application demonstrates a public purpose which the current zoning entitlements cannot
achieve.
The property is currently not zoned. So, the new PUD zoning overlay of Town Center provides a
vehicle to develop the property for a public use in providing for sale units, open space, and a
restaurant.
(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.
1. The development will create an enhanced visual impact for the east entry to Avon in regards to
Comprehensive goals to promote the resort image.
2. Long-term economic gains via transfer taxes for the Town through first sales and re-sale of the
units will continue.
3. The restaurant will also provide a tax source.
4. Pedestrian access across hwy 6 and onto hillside via a hiking trail system to Beaver Creek and a
viewing bench on the east side of the property.
5. Conservation easement dedication of upper 15+ acres of lot.
6. Sustainable building design.
7. Sustainable operations.
(3)The flexibility afforded in approval of the zoning application will result in the better siting of the
development, preserving valued environmental and cultural resources and increasing the amount of
the public benefit consistent with the community master plan documents.
New zoning allows us to provide a development located out of visual corridors and provides a large
amount of open space.
Exhibit B
15 | Page
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Introduction
The subject tract 21.52 acres and much of this property is heavily forested with the exception of the
lower section adjacent to highway 6, as well as a small additional portion mid-way up the site on the
east side. Approximately 1000’ of the north property boundary is contiguous with U.S. Highway 6
ROW.
The property has never been developed and is currently zoned PUD with no specific entitlements. We
are proposing to develop the lower, flatter section of the property that is contiguous with U.S. Highway
6. Town Center will be used as the Zone District with the PUD overlay.
Colorado World Resorts, LLC and its consultants have reviewed several options for access, orientation,
and massing. The following proposal represents our desires to provide the Town with a project that is
compatible with the current Town goals, massing, potential use and site adaptiveness based on
feedback from the current staff, Planning & Zoning Commission and the Town Council.
Existing Conditions
The existing lot size is 21.52 acres located south of U.S. Highway 6 east of the Beaver Creek
roundabout. There are approximately 4.1 acres of buildable area with grades of 40% or less. The
majority of the 4.1 acres is located in the lower section of the property in which we propose our
development.
The site flows down to Highway 6 and provides a number of possible access locations.
The property is adjacent to a developed Condominium project “The Accent”. In comparison the adjacent
property was developed much differently than we are proposing. The Accent dug a big hole with a large
retaining wall to fit the building on the site.
We are building on the flatter portion of the site and building into the hillside as well as placing the
building much further back on the site to reduce the canyon effect of the building adjacent to Hwy 6.
This is a more appropriate way to integrate into the site.
Existing Zoning and Land Use
Existing zoning is none with no specific entitlements and is currently undeveloped. We are planning a
PUD development as an overlay over Town Center Zoning. The following is a comparison of Town
Center requirements and our proposed PUD.
We are asking for the following changes:
1- Minimum front setback from 0 to 40 feet. Providing for a buffer from Hwy 6.
2- Minimum side setbacks from 7.5 feet to 22.5 and 80 feet. The 80 feet east setback is also in
consideration of a setback to the east steep slopes and open space.
3- Maximum building height to provide a variety of maximum roof heights to create a stepping of the
roof form across the site.
Exhibit B
16 | Page
Table 7.20-9 (Avon Town Code)
Dimensions for the Town Center District
PUD dimensional changes underlined and in Italics.
Min. Lot
Size
(acres or
sq. ft.)
Min. Lot
Width
(feet)
Max. Lot
Coverage
(%)
Min.
Landscape
Area (%)
Min. Front
Setback
(feet)
Min. Side
Setback
(feet)
Min. Rear
Setback
(feet)
Max.
Building
Height
(feet)
n/a n/a 50 [5] 20 0 [1, 4] 7.5 [2] 10 [3] 80
21.52 1000 50 20 40 22.5/80 [7]10 94 [6]
[1] Infill development shall match the smallest setback of existing, adjacent structures.
[2] TC abutting a residential district shall match the side yard setback standards of that district.
[3] When abutting a public street, alley or public right-of-way. The rear setback for TC abutting a residential
district shall be 20 feet, regardless of the location of any street, alley or ROW.
[4] Nonresidential development that incorporates public space such as a plaza or courtyard into the building
design may increase the front setback by up to 20 feet to accommodate that area up to 40% of the front
building line.
[5] May be increased to 80% if employee housing mitigation is provided in accordance with Section
7.20.100.
[6] Height requirements vary across east west façade to create a stepping of the roof forms. See building
height description in Development Plan.
[7] West side setback is a minimum of 22’6”. East side setback is 80 feet.
Exhibit B
17 | Page
Development Plan
Development is being proposed as a single phase project.
Proposed Density:
Condominium Break Down: 3, 2 and 1 Bed Units – (2,400 sqft Max)
Unit Total – 25
Hotel: 185 Units
Site Unit Total: 210 Unit Total
Density of 9.7 units per acres of total site or 21.52 total acres.
High Density Residential per Town Code Allows - 7.5 to 15 units per acres per future land use map.
Town Center does not note density requirements.
Building Square Footage:
Main Structure 350,000 Sq.Ft. Maximum
Setbacks: Refer to Development Plan for Building Envelops. Site walls, signs and
amenities can be located outside of the Building Setback.
Landscaping: Minimum of 20%
Building Height:
Condominium Height: Building Height 80’-0” and no more than 94’-0”
Zone 1- 45% of building length – maximum 94’-0”
Zone 2 (Transition)- 23% of building length – 94’-0 to
75’-0”
Zone 3- 25% of building length – maximum 80’-0”.
Zone 4- 7% of building length- Maximum 65’-0”
Building length along the Street frontage will be
limited to a maximum of 500’-0” in length along
U.S. Highway 6.
Site Coverage: Building footprint coverage is 50,000 Sq.Ft. Maximum.
Site Disturbance: Maximum of 50%
Uses: Planned Unit Development
Condominium
Hotel and Restaurant.
Limited Commercial
Project Phasing
The project is proposed as a single phase project.
Exhibit B
18 | Page
Access and Circulation
We have revisited the Traffic with a new Traffic Study and a meeting with the Fire Department.
History
On October 31, 2006, a meeting was held with the Colorado Dept of Transportation and Town of Avon
to discuss Highway Dept Access Permit issues, prior to submitting an application for State Access
Permit (meeting minutes are attached). The intent of the meeting was to gather information from CDOT
and TOA for the design criteria. It was discussed (among other things) that a shared/joint access with
the Accent was highly recommended, and that additional traffic studies should be completed.
Upon completion of requested information and studies (per the October meeting), we met with CDOT
again on November 29th. 3 new options were presented, and new traffic study results were reviewed,
(including the Level of Service of each driveway option, queuing lengths, delays, and safety). The
updated Traffic Study supports the access geometry and layout shown on this submittal, which is also
supported by CDOT and TOA representatives. This access plan involves coordination and approvals
from the Accent Owners. Details of the access design is somewhat dependent on the outcome of the
meeting with the Gates (primarily involving whether the “frontage” road connection to the Gates has a
gate (at the Gates’/Folson property line, or not), and whether the Folson Access (to US Highway 6) is a
full movement or partially restricted left turn (either in or out). However, the location of the access to US
Highway 6, and the internal driveway layout as shown on this submittal is not expected to change, and
the requirements of CDOT, the TOA and Fire District can be accommodated by use of a gate operable
only by the Fire Department onto the Gates property or onto Highway 6 Once the meeting with the
Gates has been held, we are ready to meet with CDOT and TOA again. We are happy to
accommodate the TOA and CDOT in participating in a shared access agreement with the Gates on
rational terms, but such is not necessary to the development of the Project.
Meetings were held with Eagle River Fire Protection District regarding Fire Dept Access issues, in
September and November of 2006, for which the recommendations have been incorporated in the plan.
We have revisited the access road with Eagle River Fire in September of 2017. At this meeting it was
confirmed the FD still requires access to the west end of the building. Access can be from the through
road or a possible turn around at the west side of the site.
Employees
Hotel/ Condominium
Front Desk- 6
Concierge – 1 on staff
Laundry - 3
Housekeeping - 10
Maintenance – 3 on staff per 2 shift, Amenity Staff – 2 maximum
Shuttle Drivers - 3
Valet – 5 (See breakdown per phase below)
Phase 1 only, peak period – 2
+ Phase 2 only, peak period – 2 (This includes Valet for Restaurant)
+ Phase 3 only, peak period - 1
Restaurant
Per shift
6 Servers
1 Busperson
1 Hostess
1 Manager
1 Bartender
6 Kitchen Staff – Total 16
Total Possible Employees - 47
Exhibit B
19 | Page
Parking Analysis
Min. Width 9’-0”
Min. Depth 18’-0”
Min. 24’-0” wide aisle for 90 degree parking.
MOST OF THE PARKING IS STRUCTURED PARKING, BELOW OR ABOVE GRADE, BUT WITHIN
THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT.
Town of Avon Requirement
Type – Use Units Multiplier Qty
Hotel Units 185 Units 1 per unit 185
Condo Units 25 Units 1 per unit 25
Restaurant 3,000 Sq.Ft. Seating/ 1 per 60 50
Guest Spots 10
Condo Total 270
PUD Request
Type – Use Units Multiplier
Hotel Units 185 Units .85 per unit 158
Condo Units 25 Units 1 per unit 25
Restaurant 3,000 Sq.Ft. Seating/ 1 per 60 50
Guest Spots 10
Condo Total 243 9% Reduction
We currently have 243 Parking Spaces provided.
171 Structured Spaces, 56 Surface.
Other items to be provided are bike storage, bike share program and a property supplied shuttle
system.
Shuttle Service
The project will be served by Fuel Efficient shuttle buses.
The shuttle will be available 24 hours.
Access to:
o Defined local route – Town of Avon- Various locations, Beaver Creek Base, Vail
transportation Center. 45 minute loops.
o Eagle Airport – Approximately every hour and a half.
o Denver Airport – Approximately 4 trips per day.
o Or as need and available to each location.
Open Space
Approximate developed area is 4.1 acres. The approximate remaining undeveloped area of 16.62
acres will remain as a Conservation Easement.
Geological Study
Original Soil studies determined the site consisted of a debris flow area. This determination meant the
developer would need to address potential large debris activity in the design of the site. This was
originally part of the 2008 submittal.
In 2008 we were prepared to additional studies of the site with more extensive studies to confirm the
debris flow. With the withdrawal of the application this never occurred. Colorado West Resorts per TAB
Associates, Inc. suggestions obtained a permit to pursue the additional test.
The test was conducted the week of August 21st and we do have preliminary results. The results were
very positive and the Geotech Engineer has determined the site is Not at risk for debris flow. It will be
reclassified as a Alluvial fan. We still need to address storm water and minor erosion but we do not
need to provide large diversion ditches behind the building.
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
20 | Page
APPENDIX
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
Town of Avon
Building Comparisons
Ascent CWR PUD
Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation
Square Feet 141,636.00 SqFt 105,351.00 SqFt 2.42 Square Feet 315,800.00 SqFt 213,444.00 SqFt 4.90
Building Ht 74.00 Feet 7,536.00 Building Ht 94.00 Feet 7,563.00
Units 40.00 Units 210.00
Site Coverage/
Footprint 23,800.00 Sqft 22.59%
Site Coverage/
Footprint 43,900.00 Sqft 20.57%
Disturbed 73,616.00 Sqft 69.88%1.69 Disturbed 172,275.00 Sqft 34.49%1.69
Density 16.54 Per AC Density 42.86 Per AC
Parking 120.00 3.00 Per Unit Includes sqft for spa, etc.Parking 243.00 1.16 Per Unit
Original Property prior to subdivision 2.42 Current Original Property prior to subdivision 4.90 Current
3.38 Dedicated to TOA 16.62 Dedicated
252,648.00 5.80 Total Lot 937,411.20 21.52 Total Lot
Unit Density 6.90 Per AC Unit Density 9.76 Per AC
Disturbed 73,616.00 29.14%1.69 Disturbed 172,275.00 18.38%1.69
Westin Restaurant 3,000.00 60 Per Sqft 50
Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation Parking 193.00
Square Feet 544,325.00 SqFt 183,400.00 SqFt 4.21 0.92
Building Ht 137.00 Feet 7,565.75
Units 291.00
Footprint 114,345.00 62.35%
Disturbed 139,840.00 76.24%3.21
Density 69.12 Per AC
Parking 319.00 0.91 Per Unit Includes sqft for spa, etc.
Restaurant 5,512.00 60 Per Sqft 92
Parking 227.00
0.78 Per unit, does not include SPA, Gym, Pool and etc.
Sheraton
Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation
Square Feet 141,985.00 SqFt 141,134.00 SqFt 3.24
Building Ht 97.00 Feet 7,556.00
Units 100.00
Site Coverage/
Footprint 43,250.00 30.64%
Disturbed 62,932.00 44.59%1.44
Density 30.86 Per AC Phase 1A Only
Parking 163.00 1.63 Per Unit
Avon Hotel
Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation
Square Feet 101,405.00 SqFt 73,709.00 SqFt 1.69
Building Ht 69.00 Feet 7,523.00
Units 148.00 Includes 6 Employee
Site Coverage/
Footprint 24,716.00 33.53%
Disturbed 73,709.00 100.00%1.69
Density 87.46 Per AC
Parking 204.00 1.38 Per Unit
Restaurant 3,709.00 60 Per Sqft 62
Parking 142.18
0.96 Per Unit
WYNDHAM
Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation
Square Feet 132,355.00 SqFt 46,522.00 SqFt 1.07
Building Ht 73.20 Feet 7,528.00
Units 58.00
Site Coverage/
Footprint 31,051.00 SqFt 66.74%
Disturbed 46,522.00 SqFt 100.00%1.07
Density 54.31 Per AC
Parking 58.00 1.00 Per Unit
Avon Center
Building Units Site Acres Actual Elevation
Square Feet 165,000.00 SqFt 118,300.00 SqFt 2.72
Building Ht 90.00 Feet 7,550.00
Units 50.00
Site Coverage/
Footprint 35,317.00 SqFt 29.85%
Disturbed 35,317.00 SqFt 29.85%0.81
Density 18.41 Per AC
Parking 0.00 0.00 Per Unit
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
Folson Property ‐ Concept Square Footage Summary
Lower Level Parking
Parking Garage 38,450 83 spots
Back Off House 8,700
47,150
Main Level Parking
Parking Garage 46,200 101 spots
Mechanical 2,800
Lower Lobby 3,800
Loading/Unloading 1,800
54,600 184 Spots
3rd Level
Units 15,300 Keys SQFT Type SQFT
Common Space 4,900 23 485 Typical 11,155
Restaurant 4,000 3 923 Suite 2,769
Gym/ Restrooms 3,000 26 13,924
Lobby 4,600
Administration 8,000
Commercial Element 1,200
41,000
4th Level
Units 34,800 Keys SQFT Type SQFT
46 485 Typical 22,310
2 672 Plus 1,344
Common Space 7,200 8 923 Suite 7,384
42,000 56 31,038
5th Level
Units 34,800 Keys SQFT Type SQFT
46 485 Typical 22,310
2 672 Plus 1,344
Common Space 7,200 8 923 Suite 7,384
42,000 56 31,038
6th Level Total
Units 33,400 Keys SQFT Type SQFT
46 485 Typical 22,310
1 672 Plus 672
Common Space 6,600 7 923 Suite 6,461
40,000 54 29,443
7th Level Keys SQFT Type SQFT
Units 24,350 1 1,100 One Bed 1,100
Common Space 4,500 10 1,550 Two Bed 15,500
28,850 3 2,400 Three Bed 7,200
14 23,800
8th Level Keys SQFT Type SQFT
Units 18,150 2 1,100 One Bed 2,200
Common Space 2,050 5 1,550 Two Bed 7,750
20,200 3 2,400 Three Bed 7,200
10 17,150
Total Square Footage 315,800 Keys SQFT Type SQFT
Measured to outside of wall 161 485 Typical 78,085
5 672 Plus 3,360
26 923 Suite 23,998
3 1,100 One Bed 3,300
15 1,550 Two Bed 23,250
6 2,400 Three Bed 14,400
Totals 216 146,393
Measured interior of walls
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.
1889 York Street
Denver, CO 80206
(303) 333-1105
FAX (303) 333-1107
E-mail: lsc@lscdenver.com
October 31, 2017
Mr. Greg Macik
TAB Associates, Inc.
56 Edwards Village Blvd., Suite 210
Edwards, CO 81632
Re: Colorado World Resorts PUD
Traffic Impact Analysis
Avon, CO
LSC #171070
Dear Mr. Macik:
In response to your request, LSC Transportation Consultants, Inc. has prepared this traffic
impact analysis for the proposed Colorado World Resorts PUD development. As shown on
Figure 1, the site is located south of US Highway 6 and east of Village Road/Avon Road in
Avon, Colorado.
REPORT CONTENTS
The report contains the following: the existing roadway and traffic conditions in the vicinity of
the site including the lane geometries, traffic controls, posted speed limits, etc.; the existing
weekday peak-hour traffic volumes; the existing daily traffic volumes in the area; the typical
weekday site-generated traffic volume projections for the site; the assignment of the projected
traffic volumes to the area roadways; the projected short-term and long-term background and
resulting total traffic volumes on the area roadways; the site’s projected traffic impacts; and any
recommended roadway improvements to mitigate the site’s traffic impacts.
LAND USE AND ACCESS
The site is proposed to include 30 residential townhome units, a 180-room hotel, a 100-seat
restaurant, and about 1,200 square feet of supportive retail. Full movement access is proposed
to US Highway 6 as shown in the conceptual site plan in Figure 2.
ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
Area Roadways
The major roadways in the site’s vicinity are shown on Figure 1 and are described below. DRAFTExhibit B
Mr. Greg Macik Page 2 October 31, 2017
Colorado World Resorts PUD
•US Highway 6 (US 6) is an east-west, two-lane state highway roadway north of the site.
It is classified as NR-A (Non-Rural Principal Highway) by CDOT. The posted speed limit in
the vicinity is 45 mph but transitions to 35 mph just west of the site.
Existing Traffic Conditions
Figure 3 shows the existing lane geometries, traffic controls, posted speed limits, and traffic
volumes in the site’s vicinity on a typical weekday. The weekday peak-hour traffic volumes and
daily traffic counts are based on US 6 traffic data from the CDOT website. The directional
distribution of existing and site traffic was based on the attached traffic counts conducted by
Counter Measures, Inc. in October, 2017 at the existing The Ascent driveway just west of the
site.
2020 and 2040 Background Traffic
Figure 4 shows the estimated 2020 background traffic and Figure 5 shows the estimated 2040
background traffic. The projected 2020 and 2040 background traffic volumes assumes an
annual growth rate of about 0.34 percent based on the CDOT 20-year growth factor of 1.07.
TRIP GENERATION
Table 1 shows the estimated weekday, morning peak-hour, and afternoon peak-hour trip
generation for the proposed site based on the formula rates from Trip Generation, 9th Edition,
2012 by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) for the proposed land use.
The proposed land use is projected to generate about 1,585 vehicle-trips on the average week-
day, with about half entering and half exiting during a 24-hour period. During the morning
peak-hour, which generally occurs for one hour between 6:30 and 8:30 a.m., about 68 vehicles
would enter and about 64 vehicles would exit the site. During the afternoon peak-hour, which
generally occurs for one hour between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m., about 76 vehicles would enter and
about 64 vehicles would exit. This assumes an internal capture of 20 percent for the restaurant
use and 50 percent for the supportive retail use and a 20 percent alternative travel mode reduc-
tion for the residential and hotel use. The alternative modes will be largely from a proposed 24-
hour shuttle service planned between the site and the Eagle County Airport, DIA, and the ski
resorts in the area.
TRIP DISTRIBUTION
Figure 6 shows the estimated directional distribution of the site-generated traffic volumes on
the area roadways. The estimates were based on those in the attached traffic counts conducted
by Counter Measures, Inc. in October, 2017 at the existing The Ascent driveway just west of
the site.
TRIP ASSIGNMENT
Figure 7 shows the estimated site-generated traffic volumes based on directional distribution
percentages (from Figure 6) and the trip generation estimates (from Table 2).DRAFTExhibit B
Mr. Greg Macik Page 3 October 31, 2017
Colorado World Resorts PUD
2020 and 2040 TOTAL TRAFFIC
Figure 8 shows the 2020 total traffic which is the sum of the 2020 background traffic volumes
(from Figure 4) and the site-generated traffic volumes (from Figure 7). Figure 8 also shows the
recommended 2020 lane geometry and traffic control.
Figure 9 shows the 2040 total traffic which is the sum of 2040 background traffic volumes
(from Figure 5) and the site-generated traffic volumes (from Figure 7). Figure 9 also shows the
recommended 2040 lane geometry and traffic control.
PROJECTED LEVELS OF SERVICE
Level of service (LOS) is a quantitative measure of the level of congestion or delay at an inter-
section. Level of service is indicated on a scale from “A” to “F.” LOS A is indicative of little
congestion or delay and LOS F is indicative of a high level of congestion or delay. Attached are
specific level of service definitions for unsignalized intersections.
The US State Highway 6/Site Access intersection was analyzed to determine the 2020 and 2040
total levels of service. Table 1 shows the level of service analysis results. The level of service
reports are attached.
•US State Highway 6/Site Access: All movements at this unsignalized intersection are
expected to operate at LOS “C” or better during both morning and afternoon peak-hours
through 2040 with implementation of the recommended improvements.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Trip Generation
1. The proposed land use is projected to generate about 1,585 vehicle-trips on the average
weekday, with about half entering and half exiting during a 24-hour period. During the
morning peak-hour, about 68 vehicles would enter and about 64 vehicles would exit the
site. During the afternoon peak-hour, about 76 vehicles would enter and about 64 vehicles
would exit. This assumes an internal capture of 20 percent for the restaurant use and 50
percent for the supportive retail use and a 20 percent alternative travel mode reduction
for the residential and hotel use. The alternative modes will be largely from a proposed 24-
hour shuttle service planned between the site and the Eagle County Airport, DIA, and the
ski resorts in the area.
Projected Levels of Service
2. All movements at the US Highway 6/Site Access intersection analyzed are expected to
operate at LOS “D” or better during both morning and afternoon peak-hours through 2040
with implementation of the recommended improvements.
Conclusions
3. The impact of the Colorado World Resorts PUD development can be accommodated by the
existing roadway network with the following improvements.DRAFTExhibit B
Mr. Greg Macik Page 4 October 31, 2017
Colorado World Resorts PUD
Recommendations
4. The northbound access approach to US 6 should be stop-sign controlled.
5. An eastbound right-turn deceleration lane is recommended on US 6 approaching the site.
An appropriate length for the 45 mph posted speed limit is a 275-foot deceleration lane
plus a 160-foot transition taper.
6. A westbound left-turn deceleration lane is recommended on US 6 approaching the site.
An appropriate length for the 45 mph posted speed limit is a 300-foot deceleration lane
(275 feet for deceleration and 25 feet for vehicle storage) plus a 160-foot transition taper.
An appropriate redirect taper would be 45:1.
7. A westbound left-turn acceleration lane is recommended on US 6 departing the site. An
appropriate length for the 35 mph posted speed limit west of the site would be a 150-foot
acceleration lane plus a 120-foot transition taper.
* * * * *
We trust our findings will assist you in gaining approval of the proposed Colorado World
Resorts PUD development. Please contact me if you have any questions or need further
assistance.
Sincerely,
LSC TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.
By___________________________________________
Christopher S. McGranahan, PE, PTOE
Principal
CSM/wc
Enclosures: Tables 1 and 2
Figures 1 - 9
Traffic Count Reports
Level of Service Definitions
Level of Service Reports
Z:\LSC\Projects\2017\171070-FolsonTract\Report\Draft-ColoWorldResorts.wpdDRAFTExhibit B
Table 1ESTIMATED TRAFFIC GENERATIONColorado World Resorts PUDAvon, COLSC #171070; October, 2017Vehicle - Trips GeneratedTrip Generation Rates(1) PM Peak - Hour AM Peak HourAveragePM Peak HourAM Peak HourAverageOutInOutInWeekdayOutInOutInWeekdayQuantityTrip Generating Category7151632260.2460.5000.5450.1127.52DU (3)30.00Townhomes (2)535539561,2380.2940.3060.2170.3136.88Rooms180.00Hotel (4)182323244830.1760.2340.2260.2444.83Seats100.00Restaurant (5)3333532.8902.2702.2702.89044.32KSF (7)1.20Retail (6)819681862,000TotalInternal Capture (8)455597Restaurant (20%)111126Retail (50%)5666122Internal Capture =Alternative Travel Mode Trips (9)133145Townhomes (20%)1111811248Hotels (20%)12141112293Internal Trips =647664681,585Net External Trips =Notes:Source: Trip Generation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 9th Edition, 2012.(1)ITE Land Use No. 230 - Townhomes - formula rates(2)DU = Dwelling Unit(3)ITE Land Use No. 310 - Hotel (formula rate for weekday rate)(4)ITE Land Use No. 932 - High-Turnover (Sit-Down Restaurant) - average rates(5)ITE Land Use No. 826 - Specialty Retail Center - no AM rates are available, so the PM rates were reversed. Formula PM rate is above range so(6)high end of range was used.KSF = 1,000 square feet(7)20% of restaurant trips and 50% of retail trips are expected to be from guests staying on-site so do not generate vehicle-trips.(8)20% of residential and hotel trips are assumed to be alternative travel modes. The majority of alternative travel mode trips are expected to be via the (9)proposed 24-hour shuttle service planned between the site and Eagle County Airport, DIA, and the ski resorts in the area. DRAFTExhibit B
Table 2Intersection Levels of Service AnalysisColorado World Resorts PUDAvon, COLSC #171070; October, 20172040 Total Traffic2040 Total Trafficwith Left-Turnwithout Left-Turn2020Accel LaneAccel LaneTotal TrafficLevel ofLevel ofLevel ofLevel ofLevel ofLevel of ServiceServiceServiceServiceServiceServiceTraffic PMAMPMAMPMAMControlIntersection LocationTWSCUS Highway 6/Site AccessCCEEDENB LeftBBBBBBNB RightAAAAAAWB Left20.120.538.742.233.235.7Critical Movement Delay DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
DRAFTExhibit B
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
1
Planning and Zoning Commission
November 21, 2017
Folson Tract
Avon, Colorado
Architect –TAB Associates, Inc.
Owner – Colorado World Resorts, LLC
Dedicated to building a beautifully designed and
meticulously operated property over the long term.
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
2
Review discussions from September
meeting.
Discuss possible path forward to vote in
December.
•History of Property since 2006
•Various submittals
•Continue extensive previous efforts
•What we heard (to be presented in bulleted
points with answers)
1. Town Center Zoning
2. Height
3. Massing
4. Front Door Experience
5. Transition to East
Grandfathered?
6. Amenities
7. Fire Egress
8. Traffic/ Parking
9. Connectivity
10. Value Add to Avon
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
3
•21.52 Acres
•Adjacent to the Ascent •Flat to steep
slope
•Higher than
Ascent pad
•Gateway to
Avon from
East
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
4
•September 19th
•November 21st
•High Quality Condo/Hotel
•Elevated Icon (Enhanced Entry)
•Quality Location (Building and Site)
•Long‐term Economic Gains
•Extension of Pedestrian Pathways
•Conservation Easement (Trails),
Pavilion‐Information Center
•Bike Share
•Sustainable design and operations
•4.7% Footprint, 18.4% Development
•Appropriate to sloping site
•Town Code
•75% structure parking
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
5
•210 Units
•Mix of Condo 12%/ Hotel 88%
•315,000 Sqft
•2 levels of structured parking
•Surface Parking
•Restaurant, limited commercial
•Shuttle Service
•PUD Overlay of Town Center Zoning
•Trail System
•Pushed back against slope
•Parking
•Expanded West Setback
•Fire Access
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
6
•Massing Comparison
•Building and Parking
•Expanded West Setback
•Fire Access
Answer
Residential –It is part of a transitional zone from
condo to medium density
Continue to review as PUD
Town Center Comparison
•Height (TC‐80 feet) – (PUD‐94’)
•Stepped VS Flat
•Average TC Height – 93’‐3” (5 Studied)
•Restricted to 45% of building. TC does
limit.
•Increased Setbacks
•Front –(TC‐0) – (PUD‐40’)
•Side –(TC‐7.5’) – (PUD‐40’)
•Site Coverage (TC‐50%) – (PUD‐50%)
•4.7% entire site.
•Average TC coverage – 80%
Comments
Is it Residential?
Grandfathered?
Appropriate?
Some Favored
Base Camp‐Ex
PUD Zoning?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
7
Answer
•Stepped west portion and sifted height to
middle of building
•Move garage entry
•Lowered floor levels
•Disturbance ‐4.7% entire site
•Added more massing examples
•Stepped building to lower height zone on west
•Discussing small pavilion building for trail
usage
Comments
Move mass east
Shift lower floor
to create more
stepping
Correct
disturbance
numbers
Perspective
showing massing
comparison
Small building on
east side
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
8
Avon ‐Aerial
CWR
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
9
•Situated against hill
•Progression to East w/ hill
•Compatible to Avon massing
Answer
•Lowered height from 104’ to 94’
•Keeping stepping limitations
•Comparisons
•Spread Sheet in Package
•Summary
Comments
Show Height
Comparisons to
other buildings
Comparison
showing year
built, parking,
square footages of
disturbance and
footprint, density
Height not issue?
Precedent Set
Transitional
Property?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
10
Answer
•Lowered height from 104’ to 94’
•Keeping stepping limitations
•Comparisons
•Spread Sheet in Package
•Summary
•Height Comparisons
•Compatible with Avon structures in height
and massing
•Can argue fits better against hill than in
middle of town
•Transitional Property
•Transitions from Ascent to hillside to Eagle‐
Vail
Comments
Show Height
Comparisons to
other buildings
Comparison
showing year
built, parking,
square footages of
disturbance and
footprint, density
Height not issue?
Precedent Set
Transitional
Property?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
11
•Our Case
•Appropriate scale against slope (mountain)
•Restricting to assure stepped height
•Starts higher –than Ascent (Elevated is Good)
•83 foot average height
•Separated from Ascent (Setback from side and Road)
•Compromised from 1000 feet long to 490 feet with
additional height over 80 feet
•No mention in Code or Comp Plan
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
12
•Restricting to assure stepped height
•32% ‐80 feet or less in Height
•83 Avg height
45%
23%23%25%25%
7%
•Appropriate scale against slope (mountain)
•Personal Feeling?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
13
•Massing
•Not Linear
•Stepping
•Appropriate scale against slope (mountain)
•Starts Higher –24 feet higher than Ascent per Town Code
•Scale –Vantage Point
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
14
•Massing
•Not Linear
•Stepping
•Massing
•Not Linear
•Stepping
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
15
•Vantage point
•Comparison
•Vantage point
•Embrace the Scale?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
16
Answer
•May items are more for the Design Review
Stage – still working on
•Reduced entry elements
•Landscape Architecture ‐Mitigation
•Green Space‐Reduce west driveway
•Parking discussion?
•More images showing stone veneer retaining
walls.
•Pedestrian Images
•Still working on Architecture of building,
design review
•Parking Lot lighting –Night sky compliant.
Reduce tall lights against hwy 6 address from
farther back in lot.
Comments
Entry Not so
Massive
Green Space in
Front‐Reduce
Asphalt
What are retaining
walls?
Pedestrian
Perspective
South Façade more
attractive
Decks and
overlooks
Parking Lot Lighting
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
17
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
18
Answer
•4 Units
•Deed restricted housing on site.
•Or off site
•Commercial draw
•Discuss other commercial
•Trail System –Conservation Easement
•Bike Share
•Sustainable Design
•Shuttle, Design, Zero Waste
Comments
Employee Housing
a must
Mixed use
necessary?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
19
Answer
•Site Plan
•A Option –drive through
•Easement in place. Would need to adjust
south.
•B Option – hammer head
•Discussed with FD
Comments
Other design
options?
Follow up with Fire
Department‐
Update?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
20
Answer
•Updated traffic study
•20% reduction for Shuttle
•How does shuttle service work, benefits
•Safety
•High Level of service
•3 Shuttles (Local, Eagle, Denver)
•Employees
•47 on site
•Parking Plan (Shuttle, Bus Route)
•Parking Reduction
•20% Hotel Rooms, 10% overall reduction
•15% 2017 Avon Study –Mixed Use
•2017 Avon Historic Study ‐.8‐.94
•Suggestion ‐1.25 per unit –Covers all uses.
Comments
CDOT Concerns
Show Comparisons
How does Shuttle
Service work?
Correct Employee
Count
Employee Parking
Plan
Not in favor of
parking reductions
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
21
Answer
•Sidewalk extends to bus drop off
•Topography interupts
•Extension of sidewalk system to bus stop and
possible trail system
•Extension, trail and uses facilitates
•Ownership of Easement still TBD
•Eagle Valley Land Trust?
•On site Ownership?
•Other
•It is what it is?
•Topography – extends to bus stop
•Building is end of path, extension of Trail
Comments
Sidewalk extents
Bike route
What facilitates
pedestrian use?
Who owns
conservations
easement and trail
system?
It is what it is?
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
22
Answer
•Need for Middle Upper Class Rooms
•Continued growth since 2010.
•Westin, BG Ritz, Park Hyatt, Four Seasons
•Average Daily Rate (ADR) increase 37%
•Revenue Per Available Room(RevPAR) increase 57%
•Room Demand up 15%
•61% average occupancy (12 month)
•90%‐100% during peak
•2016 revenue up 58%
•Trail
•16+ acres open conservation easement
•Addition 2+ acres not developed
Comments
Room Occupancy
need?
Open Space Plan
•High Quality Condo/Hotel
•Elevated Icon (Enhanced Entry)
•Quality Location (Building and Site)
•Long‐term Economic Gains
•Extension of Pedestrian Pathways
•Conservation Easement (Trails),
Pavilion‐Information Center
•Bike Share
•Sustainable design and operations
•4.7% Footprint, 18.4% Development
•Appropriate to sloping site
•Town Code
•75% Structure parking
Exhibit B
11/14/2017
23
1. Consensus the proposed height and massing is
acceptable to move forward with a preliminary
PUD application. 83 Approx. Average Height.
2. If the height is not acceptable what are the
reasons (findings) that the height is not
compatible with the surroundings. It is based on
personal preferences at the PUD level?
3. Parking deduction acceptable?
Exhibit B
1
Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
I. Call to Order – The meeting was called to order at 5:04pm.
II. Roll Call – All Commissioners were present.
III. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda – There were no additions or amendments.
IV. Conflicts of Interest – There were no stated conflicts of interest.
V. Master Sign Program Update – 230 Chapel Place
File: SGN17011
Legal Description: Tract B2 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Applicant: Monte Park
Summary: Monte Park and Michael Holm presented an application to allow a single tenant
engaged in providing urgent care at 230 Chapel Place to have additional sign area.
Action: Commissioner Barnes motioned to approve an updated application, with the
following Findings and Conditions:
Findings:
1. The application was reviewed according to section 15.28.080 of the Avon Municipal
Code and found in compliance with section 15.28.070; and
2. Increase in signage is necessary for Urgent Care wayfinding.
Conditions:
1. The application shall be modified to provide for the removal of the “Urgent Care”
and “Vail Health” signs on the parapet of the buildings at the time a second tenant
gets a TCO on a tenant finish within the building;
2. The “Urgent Care” sign shall be turned off after business hours;
3. The total sign square footage shall not exceed 108 square feet which is a 35% increase
over the 80 square feet allotted, due to the unique wayfinding needs of the business,
and can be placed on locations identified in locations on Exhibit 1 and 2 in the packet;
and
4. Sign uses for other facades of the building shall be reviewed by the Planning &
Zoning Commission.
Commissioner Glaner seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously 7-0.
VI. Special Review Use – 228 and 238 West Beaver Creek Boulevard - PUBLIC HEARING
File: SRU15004
Legal Description: Lot 37 A&B Lot 38 A&B Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek
Applicant: Todd Roehr
Summary: Application to extend the Bed and Breakfast use in perpetuity.
Action: Commissioner Barnes motioned to continue the application until the April 3, 2018
Planning & Zoning meeting, pending more information of the use from the winter
season. Commissioner Howell seconded the motion and the motion carried
unanimously 7-0.
2
VII. Rezoning – Town of Avon Zoning Map - PUBLIC HEARING
File: REZ17003
Legal Description: Town of Avon
Applicant: Town of Avon
Summary: Update of the Avon Zoning Map.
Action: Commissioner Minervini motioned to recommend approval of the application with
the following Finding:
1. The Application was reviewed in accordance §7.16.050, Rezonings, Avon
Development Code, as outlined in the staff report for the October 17, 2017 public
hearing.
Commissioner Nusbaum seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously 7-
0.
VIII. Appointment of PZC member to the Village (at Avon) Design Review Board
Summary: Commissioner Hardy was voted to be appointed to serve on the Village (at Avon)
DRB.
IX. Approval of Minutes from October 17, 2017 Meeting
Action: Commissioner Howell motioned to approve the meeting minutes. Commissioner
Golembiewski seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously 7-0.
X. Approval of Record of Decisions
• TMP17003 – Temporary parking on Lot 3, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
• PUD17002 – Minor PUD Amendment for Lots 4-7, Riverfront Subdivision
• REZ17002 – Short Term Rental Overlay District for Nottingham Road
• VAR17002 – Variance to Solar PV Regulations for Lot 4, Wildridge Acres
• SRU17002/MNR17050 – Special Use Permit and Minor Design for 2 live/work Units on Lot 12, Block 1,
Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
Action: Commissioner Golembiewski motioned to approve the meeting minutes.
Commissioner Minervini seconded and the motion passed unanimously 6-0 with
Commissioner Howell abstaining.
XI. Staff Updates
• SGN17012 – Dominos Sign Design at 51 Beaver Creek Place
• MNR17052 – Solar Panels at 2680 Beartrap Road
• MNR17051 – Landscape modification at 5040 Wildridge Road East
XII. Adjourn – The meeting was adjourned at 7:37 pm.
Approved this 21st Day of November 2017
SIGNED: ___________________________________________
Lindsay Hardy, Chairperson