Loading...
PZC Minutes 120596Record of Proceedings Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Worksession (6:15 p.m.) Follow up on Planning and Zoning Commission Goal Setting and Visioning Regular Meeting The regular meeting of the town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Jack Hunn at 7:37 p.m., December 5, 1995, in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building; 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. All members were present. Members Present: Jack Hunn Sue Railton Buzz Reynolds Bill Sargis Rhoda Schneiderman Beth Stanley Henry Vest Staff Present: Jacquie Halburnt, Recording Secretary George Harrison, Assistant Planner Steve Hodges, Community Services Officer Bill James, Town Manager Mike Matzko. Director, Community Deveiopment Additions and Amendments to the Agenda None Conflicts of Interest None Consent Agenda The following items were scheduled on the Consent Agenda: A. Approval of the November 21, 1995 Meeting Minutes Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 2 B. Lot 2, Avon Town Square Subdivision, Phase I; The Norwest Center Project Type: Master Sign Program Owner: Alfred Williams Applicant: Larry Ast, High Tech Signs George Harrison described the consent agenda. Mr. Harrison indicated that at this point the purpose of the master sign program was to establish a program for size and placement of the letters. Mr. Harrison also presented a sample of the plastic material. Commissioner Sargis made a motion to approve the consent agenda. Commissioner Railton seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. Final Design Review Mike Matzko stated that the Town Planner, Karen Griffith. was unable to attend the meeting and he would be filling in for her. A. Lot 7, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision Project Type: Final Design Review for 10 multi -family units Property Owner: Phil Thurault Applicant: Randy Curry Property Address: 1080 W. Wildwood Architect Randy Curry presented the project. Mr. Curry indicated the project was a resubmittal that addressed previous Commission concerns. He stated that it was the fourth design on the extremely narrow and steep 2 112 acre site and it eliminated the twenty -foot retaining walls, spread the units apart, and staggered them vertically. Mr. Curry reiterated that he worked with a very narrow and steep !ot. He stated the footprint for the building was a small 25 x 30 and he could not step back into the mountain anymore without putting in more retaining walls. Therefcre, he built upward. Mr. Curry stated that Inter -Mountain had submitted an architectural and landscaping change on Friday, December 1. Mike Matzko explained the change missed the deadline for inclusion in the Commission packets. Chairperson Hunn indicated the Commissioners might not be able to take final action on the change because they had not reviewed it. Duke Ferringer with Inter -Mountain Engineering continued the presentation. NIr. Ferringer stated that in response to Staff comments; the slopes were no more than 2:1, and the steepness of the grades had been reduced. Chairperson Hunn Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 3 asked how tall the retaining wall would become with the revised plan. Mr. Ferringer stated the maximum height was 6 feet and most of the wali was 4 feet. Commissioner Schneiderman identified the few darker spots on the site plan as depicting undisturbed areas, and she stated she thought pretty much the whole site was being disturbed. Mr. Ferringer indicated they were regrading the whose lot. Commissioner Schneiderman stated she thought if the whole lot had to be regraded, then they were putting the wrong project on it. She stated she thought they were forcing the project onto the lot. Commissioner Railton questioned the scale of the model. Chairperson Hunn indicated it was not a realistic depiction of the site topography. It was not to scale vertically. Commissioner Reynolds suggested stepping the foundation up the hill side which would relieve the foundation walls in back (as per TOA's Steep Slope Guidelines). Mr. Curry stated that they did not have room to do that. Commissioner Schneiderman stated she thought the , G identica! units were unacceptable and boring. Commissioner Reynolds stated that the lots were zoned many years ago with good intentions. He was not sure that the intention was for 10 townhome units. He said he thought the units looked forced and preferred to see something else. Commissioner Vest stated he thought that even with one building on the lot, it would be a tough road cut. He also stated that although the lot is 2 1/2 acres; few are buildable acres. Chairperson Hunn stated he was encouraged that Mr. Curry was able to improve the project, i.e., the driveway grade below 8%, retaining walls to within 6 feet and the regrading slopes to 2:1. However, the outcome of the project would be impactful on the site and vicinity because of the apparent need to platform. Chairperson Hunn suggested pulling the units forward and pushing the grade back to meet the garages. Mr. Curry stated that it would result in more retaining walls. Mr. Curry presented two color schemes; one dark green vinyl, t+ne otner dark. blue. He indicated they wanted to use one or the other. Mr. Curry stated the balcony railings and the roofs will be painted the dark color; and the, prefer stone over stucco. Chairperson Hunn suggested tabling the project. Commissioner Vest stated he thought the Commission needed to respond to the applicant and tel; him what they thought. He didn't think they would accomplish anything by sending the applicant away for two weeks. Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 4 Chairperson Hunn summarized the project by stating the Commission had staff memorandum recommending denial based cn the information, that had bee, presented, they had new information that might relieve some of the concerns, but Commission did not know that for sure, and they had a model that was not a true depiction of what the building would look like on the site. Commissioner Schneiderman made a motion to deny Lot t, Block 5; Wildridge Subdivision. Seconded by Commissioner Reynolds. Motion carried with four yea votes and three nay votes. Mr. Curry stated he needed to know what the Commission was going to allow or. the lot. Chairperson Hunn suggested that he read the December:,; 1995; Planning and Zoning Commission meeting minutes and work with Staff with the new information. Commissioner Reynolds stated that it didn't matter if 2, 4, 6, or 8 units were placed on the lot, it had to work without platforming. B. Lots 45&46, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Lakeside PUD Project Type: Rezoning and PUD Property Owner: Points of Colorado, Inc. and Lakeside Terrace, L.L.C. Applicant: Larry Doll Property Address: 320 and 340 Benchmark Road Larry Doll, president of Points of Colorado, presented the project. He explained Points of Colorado had been with Falcon Point since it was a vacant buiiding n 1985. He stated they were able to make a significant economic impact to the success of the project and contribute to the growth of town. They now noped to develop Falcon Point II. Mr. Doll indicated his staff worked over the weekend to address Stas* comments, which were: 1. Parking meets minimum requirements, 2. Need landscape screening, 3. Reduction of pedestrian access, 4. Marginal snow storage, 5. Landscaping in front of building was minimal. He stated he thought by making minor modifications they more adequately provided for some of Staff concerns. First, Mr. Doll stated they had moved the building toward the park wyiich created a 7 foot band of landscaping and a sidewalk, added additional snow storage, Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page and increased the separation between the townhome project and ;heir proposed project by creating planters in between parking spaces. He stated they also removed the barrier between the two projects, made a common parking area created a traffic flow pattern that did not limit the townhome project to one entryway, and maintained zoning requirements. Mr. Doll indicated that their plan was superior to underground parking. He stated there were two reasons to have underground parking: 1. to increase landscaping and 2. add additional parking, or 3., Commissioner Schneiderman added, to screen parking. He indicated they would lose landscaping with underground parking. Project Architect Stuart Olson described the loss of landscaping as a ioss of square footage for a turnaround in the underground parking and some loss of spaces outside for a generator. Commissioner Sargis asked Mike Matzkc about zoning requirements of one space per 600 feet and the individual building which is 37;000 square feet. Nlr. Matzko replied that Falcon Point met both requirements. Mr. Olson presented color and texture samples. He aisc pointed ou: that there was an addition of a penthouse. Public Hearing Chairperson Hunn opened the public hearing Attorney Brett Heckman and Manager Mike Bennett stated they representec Beaver Creek West, which is north of the proposed project and has 124 units ana owners. Mr. Heckman indicated they would focus on cne issue - complete deprivation of view corridors, which would result in devaluation of property of at least $500,000.00. Mr. Bennett indicated for the record that Falcon Point had been a good neighbor and they ran a reputable operation. Mr. Bennett referenced the Lake Side Terrace project. which obstructed some Beaver Creek West views; but it still left a view corridor. He states they aid not have a problem with the development and did not protest the construction of Lake Side Terrace. However, Mr. Bennett stated he thought the proposed Falcon Point it construction was a different story that ;eft absolutely no view corridors. He brought photographs that depicted the potential view obstructier, as well as a video tape that he claimed showea that Lake Side Terrace project Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page left a view corridor; and that the proposed Falcon Point II wouid cover most of the view. Mr. Bennett estimated lost views at about $10,000 per unit for a tote devaluation of $1,250,000.00. He offered the information that during the day, the cars were gone, but at night time, the parking lot at Beaver Creek West was jam-packed. Mr. Heckman indicated that the original Lake Side Terrace proposal had height limits of 41 feet, while the proposed Falcon Point 11 project exceeded 61 feet. He also indicated it was very hard to present the project through pictures and a video. He implored the Commission to walk the site because it was a unicue situation. Mr. Heckman stated Beaver Creek West was the oldest project in town and the proposed Falcon Point I! project devalued the property owners' investments and completely robbed them of their views. Mr. Heckman stated he thought the proposed Falcon Point II project was in violation of set backs, had minimal parking, had problems with pedestrian access; traffic, and snow storage. He stated he thought a project with this many problems should not be rewarded by allowing double the allowed density. Mr. Heckman referenced section 17.04.30 of the zoning code that sets forth the intent for PUD planning and zoning, Section O, "it is Commission and Council duty to conserve the value cf peoples' investments, and Section 1, "preserve scenic views", and ir: design review criteria it specifically says "pay attention to building heights and views". The next public comment was from Lynn Weas who indicated he had been the managing director of the Christie Lodge for 7 1/2 years and involved in real estate management and finance for 25 years. He was acting as a proponent of time shares and the proposed Falcon Point 11. He discussed time shares ar,d how Marriott, Hilton, Hyatt, Embassy Suites, Ramada; and Disney had he!pec change the concept of what time shares were. Mr. Weas stated he reviewed the plans and in his professional opinion, the parking worked and he placed the proposed Falcon Point 11 project in the 90th percentile; oniy 10% would outrank it. Mr. Weas stated that the surrounding properties of the Christie Lodge are not level and it had not devalued the Christie Lodge. He further stated that time shares do not use as many parking spots as everyone thought. He stressed the Christie Lodge had never been without parking spaces and he even licensed parking spaces to the Vail Valley Foundation. Mr. Weas supported she project and recommended that the Commission approve it. The next public comment was from Harvey Deutch, owner of Lake Side Terrace property. He stated he worked with Larry Doll on the design of the propose"" Falcon Point II to create a compatible development. He stated ne thought that the quality of this project would improve everyone's values. Chairperson Hunn closed the Public Hearing Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 7 Commissioner Reynolds stated that he was concerned about the view from tha park that the Commission had worked really hard to preserve. He also stated that the curtain effect bothered him. He stated he wanted tc tare more time _c look at the project and think about the overall picture. He indicated :hat he walked through the area midday and the parking lot was full of cars. Commissioner Stanley questioned if snow storage had been addressed. Mr. Olson indicated they are in compliance with 20% snow storage and 5% internal landscaping. Commissioner Vest commented that the photographs from Beaver Creek West that showed potential obstructed views of units 3, 6, 11, 13; 14: 16, & 25 al! had mature landscaping and one would look right into a tree; anyway. He noticed that another level had been added to the building for a penthouse. Commissioner Vest stated that they had addressed everything he needed to support the project as the final piece that is missing in the area. Commissioner Sargis stated he thought it was a beautiful project and worKed well. He did not see the project as negative from the lake side, but did from structures on other side. However, he stated he felt that if from this point on the Commission said that nothing could be built that would block a view. there would be no more construction in the Town of Avon. He also stated he had not seer, any property values go down in the last three years. Commissioner Sardis stated he supported the project. Commissioner Schneiderman indicated that when the owners of Beaver Creek West bought their units, they were well aware cf the zoning in surrounding properties and what might be developed there. However; she stated they were talking about a PUD that increased the density and it was a whole new ballgame. Commissioner Schneiderman stated when, a developer asks for more than they've got by right, there must be sensitivity shown to existing structures ,n the area. She indicated that it was a difficult decision. She stated sne tncugt,,t everything was copacetic and didn't realize that the Beaver Creek West owners had an objection; therefore, she needed to be more circumspect wnen dealing with this project. Commissioner Railton indicated she had driven around the site and was disturbed when saw what would happen to Beaver Creek West. She stated she thought the proposed building was one story too high, and one bay too wide on each end. Commissioner Railton continued with the following comments: they must plant large evergreen trees along the street because the people at Beaver Creek West would be looking at a parking lot, a fence was unacceptable for mountainside properties, and they must comply with all setbacks. Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 8 Mike Matzko indicated that the Residential High Density (RHD) neignt limit was 60 feet. Chairperson Hunn asked for clarification on where the concern was for setbacKs. Holly Parker stated the staff memo referred to 2 1/2 feet on the side between the townhomes and the proposed property. She stated they received 2 months ago; in writing, that infringing on the setback on that side was no problem. Commissioner Schneiderman questioned the back side of the lot, which was 5 feet and not within town guidelines. Commissioner Schneiderman indicated Staff can not approve setbacks, only Commission can. Chairperson Hunn: asked Mike Matzko if they were amending the current PUD or creating a new PUD? Mr. Matzko explained it was a new PUD in that it was redefining the property and in the new PUD the allowable zoning increased. Commissioner Sargis stated that Commission relied greatly on Staff; and Staff recommended approval with conditions on the design from a week ago. He stated he thought they had addressed Staff's conditions; however; they had two new designs with them, and a motion to approve whole package would be hard to do that night. Commissioner Reynolds suggested tabling the project so the proposed project owners could talk to their neighbor, Commission could get more information from Staff, and Commission could go look at the proposed project. Commissioner Reynolds made a motion to table Lots 45&46, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Commissioner Schneiderman seconded the motion. Chairperson Hunn asked Mr. Matzko if Commissions motion postponea the Council's review because Commission was not sending recom.mendaticns as a result of their motion. Mr. Matzko indicated Council could continue he public hearing until the next available council meeting or choose to act independently of P&Z and any recommendation they had. Chairperson Hunn asked the Commissioners to tei! the applicant what they would like to see when he came back. Commissioner Railton stated she thought at least a story should be cut off the two pods on the side. Commissioner Schneiderman stated she would like to see it sensitive t -- surrounding views if asking for increased density. Meeting Minutes December 5 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 9 Commissioner Sargis stated with a little more analyzation of the site plan, it was a very workable project. Commissioner Vest stated the project was fine, but he did not need to see the penthouse. He stressed neighborly contact with Beaver Creek West before the next meeting. Commissioner Stanley stated she liked the project, but agreed with Commissioners Railton and Reynolds and maybe the applicants should even take an entire floor off of the building. Chairperson Hunn stated by the next meeting he wanted to clearly understand the current and new PUD's and the differences. He indicated the PUD was very much in negotiation and there needed to be tradeoffs. He also suggested lowered side wings to create variety and sensitivity to view corridors. Larry Doll stated this lot was zoned for 31 units , 48 000 so. feet and 50 fee: high; compared with 42 suggested units (38% increase) and 37,000 sq. feet. The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Matzko stated the 30 day resubmittal deadline would not hold in this case. Other Business Chairoerson Hunn stated he had three items for discussion First, John Orcutt's sign promoting his occupation was still in his yard. Mr. Matzko indicated Staff would be following up on that matter this week. Secondly, on Eagle Bend III, there were very large alphabetical letters to define the buildings that Chairperson Hunn did not recall reviewing. He stated he thought it made them look more obvious as a property. Steve Hodges stated it was a continuation of the first project. Finally, Chairperson Hunn stated he thought it was a good time to institute the need for gravel on the first twenty feet of a site. He stated that Beck's addition was generating a !ot mud onto the street. George Harrison stated he talked to them, and they indicated they had special street sweeping equipment. The Commission highly doubted such equipment existed. A Planning and Zoning Commission mission statement was proposed by Chairperson Hunn "preserve and enhance the quality of life; quality of our Meeting Minutes December 5, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Page 10 environment and the property values through the responsible facilitation of quality developments in strict compliance with the rules, regulations, goals and objections of the Town of Avon." Commissioner Schneiderman stated she thought the statement should have included something about handling growth responsibly. Chairperson Hunn stated that everyone could see his statement in print and discuss it at the next meeting. Adjournment Commissioner Schneiderman moved to adjourn the meeting. It was seconded by Commissioner Sargis and the meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Jacqueline Halburnt Recording Secretary Commission Approval J. Hunn S. Railton A. Reynol B. Sargis R. Schnei B. Stanley H. Vest � Du.0