Loading...
PZC Minutes 011999 (2)Planning and Zoning Commission Record of Proceedings January 19, 1999 The Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission regularly meets at 6:00 p.m. on the first and third Tuesday of each month, in the Avon Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, CO 81620. Meeting agendas are posted at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting in the following locations: Avon Municipal Building lobby; Avon City Market lobby; Avon Recreation Center lobby; Avon/Beaver Creek Transit Center Commission Members Mike Dantas Chris Evans, Chair Anne Fehlner, Vice Chair Paul Klein Greg Macik Sue Railton, Secretary Brian Sipes Agenda I. Call to Order Staff Members Karen Griffith, Town Planner Beth Salter, Recording Secretary George Harrison, Planner Steven Hodges, Community Service Officer Mike Matzko, Community Development Director Commissioner Evans called the meeting to order at 6:05 P.M. II. Roll Call All Commissioners present except for Commissioner Fehlner. III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda None IV. Conflicts of Interest None V. Consent Agenda A. Approval of the January 5, 1999, Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Motion: Commissioner Dantas moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Klein seconded. Motion passed with Commissioner Macik abstaining. Planning & Zoning Commissio Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 2 of 12 VI. Public Hearing A. Lot 61, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Application Type: PUD Rezoning Property Owner: IDG3 LLC Applicant: Michael Hazard Associates Address: 0075 Benchmark Road Mike Matzko summarized the staff report, stating that Lot 61 is a 1.07 acre site adjacent to the Avon Center building, with frontage on the Avon Pedestrian Mall and on West Benchmark Road. The site is zoned Town Center (TC), and has been used intermittently as an unpaved surface parking lot. The owner, IDG3 LLC, is requesting a zone change to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow increased building height, increased density, reduced building setbacks, and a reduced number of parking spaces. There is no development plan proposed. Mr. Matzko pointed out that the staff recommended approval conditioned upon the amount of density, setbacks and height be determined at final development plan approval. Michael Hazard, representing the applicant, said they want to create an urban development. He said they have addressed the building heights and the setbacks. They have requested 75% site coverage, which is slightly greater than that granted on Lots B and C. He said the proposed parking standards match those granted to Lots B and C, and the Confluence. He said they have an access easement between this lot and the Seasons Building that is approximately 10 feet below grade. Commissioner Railton said she is concerned about the setbacks. She agrees that the west side could be a zero set back (because of the large blank wall on the Seasons), but not on the East side. She said there is no zero set back because of the over hang on the second story. She said it is hard to make decisions on the set backs when there is no development plan. Commissioner Dantas said building one hundred ten units is going to create parking problems. He said the applicant is asking for a lot of height for such a small lot. Commissioner Railton said the Planning & Zoning Commission did not recommend approving the height requirement for the Confluence site; it was Town Council. Commissioner Macik said he has no problem with the proposed uses, but felt that the height should step down (from the Avon Center to the Seasons). He also questioned the lack of guest parking spaces. He agreed with the set backs on the west, but not with the rest; he said he likes the separation between the mall and the Seasons. Commissioner Sipes said it is not in the best interest of P& Z addressing the PUD and the rezoning issues at the same time. He said they need to see a development plan first. If they were to see a development plan they would be able to support some of the issues presented. Mr. Hazard said that the P&Z, through the Design Review process, still has the right to rewrite the plan: Planning & Zoning Commissiu, Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 3 of 12 Mr. Matzko said that the zoning code did not anticipate this problem. The P&Z is not obligated to allow a certain amount of height. As soon as you rezone a site to a PUD, you are by definition creating certain standards to go with it. The zoning code assumes that the PUD is based on a development plan. Commissioner Klein said he is concerned that this PUD is not in conformance with the Town Comprehensive plan. Commissioner Evans reminded the Commission and the applicant that when reviewing Lot B and the Confluence site, he stated that it should not set a precedent. He said he cannot say yes without a development plan; even though he probably has no problem with the 110 units per acre density because that is what we are trying to establish in the down town area, he doesn't like not knowing what the 110 units are. He asked about the lack of guest parking. He also said that zero setbacks may be 100 % fine, but until we know what we are agreeing to, he is afraid they won't end up with what is shown on the pictures. He said it should step down from Avon Center and the Seasons. Commissioner Railton approved of what staff recommended. Commissioner Sipes said it (the staff recommendation) takes the guts out of the whole thing. Why not ask for both applications to come to P&Z at the same time. Mr. Hazard said the difficulty in doing it together is that it is a moving target; a 30 to 50 million dollar project. What holds true for Vail Associates should be the same for them. Mr. Hazard said they are entertaining a variety of commercial, retail, housing plans and they are trying to decide what to do. In order to come before P&Z it needs to be a good plan. He said the present Town Center Zoning does not work well with this site. Commissioner Evans said the height, set backs, and destiny are fine but as for approving anything they need to see a development plan with much more specifics that what is being proposed. Lot B has followed the process by the book, and this has worked very well. Mr. Hazard said he is sure that P&Z granted a PUD to lot B before they had a development plan. Mr. Matzko said lot B had a pretty specific development plan at the time of the PUD. The only thing missing at their time of application was building elevations, but that in general they did not vary much from the proper procedure. Commissioner Dantas said if the height is the same, as Avon Center Avon Center will not have any views. Commissioner Evans said there just not enough information provided to approve. Mr. Hazard asked if the public hearing could be tabled? Mr. Matzko suggested that this application not be tabled or withdrawn. He suggested that a motion be made and the applicant come back with a development plan. Planning & Zoning Commissiu, Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 4 of 12 Motion: Commissioner Railton moved to deny the adoption of Resolution 99-3, recommending approval of a zone change from TC to PUD and approval of Development Standards for Lot 61, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, on the basis that the current application does not provided enough information to grant the set backs, height, and density requested. Commissioner Sipes seconded. The motion passed unanimously. B. Lot C, Avon Center At Beaver Creek Subdivision Application Type: Special Review Use for Temporary Parking Property Owner/Applicant: Vail Resorts Development Company Consultant: Mark Donaldson, VMD Architects Address: 0440 West Beaver Creek Boulevard George Harrison said the applicant is requesting a Special Review Use (SRU) Permit for temporary public parking to accommodate visitors during the upcoming World Cup Alpine Championships. Its heaviest use is anticipated to be on the dates of February 2, 4, and 6. The proposed parking facility would accommodate approximately 250 cars. Heather Bernard with the Vail Valley Foundation said they were opening the parking lot for the Vail Valley Ski Championships but now that they will be able to use the Stolport for parking they will not be using this lot as much as they had planned. Ed O'Brian said he was told this afternoon that they would be using this parking lot regularly for volunteers. Motion: Commissioner Dantas moved to approve Resolution #99-1, granting a Special Review Use Permit to operate a temporary public parking facility on Lot C, Avon Center at Beaver Creek Subdivision, for the period of January 30, 1999 to February 16, 1999, as described in the application and site plan dated January 15, 1999, subject to the following conditions: 1. That gravel or other materials be used at the site's entrance to lessen the amount of mud tracked onto West Beaver Creek Boulevard. 2. That the site be re -graded and re -vegetated as early as possible in the spring of 1999 and no later than May 29, 1999. 3. That a split rail fence be installed along the parcel's West Beaver Creek Boulevard frontage as early as possible in the spring of 1999 and no later than May 29, 1999. Commissioner Railton seconded. The motion passed unanimously. C. Lot 1, Wildwood Resort, Wildwood Subdivision Application Type: Special Review Use for Temporary Parking Property Owner: Oscar Tang, Tanavon Corp. Applicant: Vail Valley Foundation Address: 0110 Mountain Star Road Mr. Harrison said the applicant is requesting a Special Review Use (SRU) Permit for temporary public parking to accommodate visitors during the upcoming World Cup Alpine Championships. Its heaviest use is anticipated to be on the dates of February 2, 4, and 6. The proposed parking facility would accommodate approximately 300 cars. Planning & Zoning Commissiuo Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 5 of 12 Motion: Commissioner Railton moved to approve Resolution # 99-2, granting a Special Review Use Permit to operate a temporary public parking facility on Lot 1, Wildwood Resort PUD, for the period of January 30, 1999 to February 16, 1999, as described in the application and site plan dated January 14, 1999, subject to the following conditions: 1. That gravel or other materials be used at the site's entrance to lessen the amount of mud tracked onto Swift Gulch Road. 2. That the site be re -vegetated as early as possible in the spring of 1999 and no later than May 29, 1999. 3. That a split rail fence be installed along the length of the parcel's frontage along Nottingham Road and Swift Gulch Road as early as possible in the spring of 1999 and no later than May 29, 1999. Commissioner Klein seconded. The motion passed unanimously. VII. Final Design Review A. Lot 11, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision — Vista Mayor Townhomes Application Type: Design Modification of fourplex under construction Property Owner: Monument Realty Investments Inc. Applicant: Fred Hiller Address: 3078 Wildridge Road Karen Griffith said that Monument Realty Investments, Inc., represented by Fred Hiller, has applied for three modifications to the final design for the Vista Mayor Townhomes: 1. They have modified the grading plan to construct a 3 -foot and a 7 -foot retaining wall in place of two 13 -foot retaining walls. 2. A modification of the window design, to eliminate the windows on the west side of each unit and to add an irregular shaped window next to an existing window on the western end unit. 3. To modify the parking plan to provide the required quest parking spaces in front of the units, and to add optional spaces on the south side of the driveway entrance Following is a discussion on each request. 1. Grading_plan modification: the engineering staff supports the modification as preferred to the original design. However, the modification doubled the amount of site disturbance, from 100 feet above the driveway to approximately 200 feet above the driveway. The adjacent Town property has also been disturbed. Staff recommended approval of the modification with the condition that the modified area, including the adjoining Town property, be re -vegetated. Based on a consultation with a professional landscape company that specializes in site restoration we recommend that the area be re -vegetated to 30 percent of the original sagebrush cover. This would be 3 sagebrush plants for every 100 square feet. Based on two test plots that staff counted a total of 600 sage plants would be required on the subject property. Staff also suggested a temporary irrigation system be installed and surety be posted for a two-year period to ensure the re -vegetation is successful. 2. Window modifications: staff supports the window modifications as proposed. 3. Parking modification: staff supports the parking modification with the condition that a grading plan be submitted and approved by staff for the area of the additional parking spaces. Planning & Zoning Commissiu Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 6 of 12 Commissioner Railton asked if there is a need for a landscaping plan because of the regrading. Ms. Griffith said staff thinks it would be a good idea for a landscape plan to be submitted for staff approval. She suggested shrubbery be added to the front of the parking spaces. Fred Hiller said when building on the parking, drainage and wall areas they found a opportunity to changed the grade around a little bit from the garages to the driveway and putting the driveway closer to the road and by doing so eliminated the need for 13 foot walls. By changing the grade of the driveway he said they went form a 10% grade to a 6 or 7 % grade, with a much flatter area in front of the units. He said that the man that bought unit D wants all three of the parking spaces for a basketball court and parking. Moving the driveway out gave them two additional parking spaces behind each garage. He said they hired a engineer that assumed it was supposed to be 2:1 grading when this project was approved for 1:5 so in the end there has been less site disturbance than what is shown on the plans. Ms. Griffith said staff is comfortable working with the applicant regarding these issues. Mr. Hiller said this is the first time he heard of 600 sage plants. Commissioner Dantas pointed out that it is a big hill. Mrs. Griffith said the horticulturist is recommending the sage be knee high, not the one -gallon size. Mr. Hiller said replanting sage was not in the original plans. He said the site is solid rock. Grading that was done by Buz Reynolds was done up and down. There was so much bedrock underneath that the machine could not get hold. Because of this it would be difficult to revegetate. He said he proposes to plant a few sagebrush along a few benches around where the out cropping of rock naturally occurs, but feels that 600 sage brush plants is a lot of planting. Commissioner Klein said he has not problem with the stone retaining walls; but looking at the original plan it is puzzling as to how the windows and the location of the chimney flues got to this point with out being approved. He said that the change of the windows makes the mass of the building look much larger. He also said that the Town guidelines do not allow for nanny's quarters; that the additional parking spaces are not necessary, and if the additional parking spaces are approved, additional landscaping should be required. Mr. Hiller said when looking out the windows on the end of each unit you look down into the living area of the next door unit. Commissioner Sipes said he understands why the change with the windows that were looking down into the adjacent units but this does not address the other window changes. He said the Commission has had numerous occasions when applicants come back after they have finished their project with their changes and then ask for approval. He reminded Mr. Hiller that most of these changes occurred in July of 1998, and there was sufficient amount of time for him to come and get approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission. Commissioner Macik said once again these issues should have been brought before the Planning & Zoning Commission. He said he agrees with staff's recommendation of the amount of shrubbery to be planted. Planning & Zoning Commissiu Meeting Minutes C January 19, 1999 Page 7 of 12 Commissioner Dantas said he likes what was done on the 2 -tiered walls and he said with 6 bedrooms he understands the need for additional parking spaces but said there needs to be landscaping in front of the parking spaces. He agreed with staff's recommendation for the need to revegetating with 600 sagebrush. Commissioner Railton emphasized that she is sick of people making changes to buildings when they know that you need approval from staff. She said it is a shame what Mr. Hiller did with the windows. She said putting in 600 sage bushes is the least that the applicant could do for all the problems that he has caused the staff. Commissioner Evans said the window does not make any architectural sense at all. He asked Mr. Hiller why he did not put in the approved chimney flues. He reminded the applicant that he did not have staff approval for these changes. He said he would like to see the site revegetated to the original plans. Motion: Commissioner Dantas moved to approve part 1 of the final design for Vista Major, as described in the application materials and plan sets stamped received December 22, 1999, with one condition: 1. The area of the grading modification shall be re -vegetated at a ratio of 3 plants for every 100 square feet of disturbed area, subject to the evaluation by town staff. Temporary irrigation shall be established and separate surety provided. The Town's property shall be re -vegetated at a ratio of 3 plants for every 100 square feet of disturbed area. Commissioner Klein seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Motion: Commissioner Macik moved to approve part 2 for the final design for Vista Manor, as described in the application materials and plan sets stamped received December 22, 1999, with a second condition: 1. A grading plan shall be submitted for staff approval for the additional parking spaces with additional landscaping and a berm that limits lights trespass for a truck with staff approval. Commissioner Klein seconded. Motion passed unanimously. Motion: Commissioner Railton moved to deny the exterior modification including windows and chimney flues as described in the application materials and plan sets stamped received December 22, 1998. Commissioner Klein seconded. Motion passed with Commissioner Macik abstaining. B. Lot 21, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision - Burkhard Duplex Application Type: Final Design, new duplex Property Owner/Applicant: Eric and Sondra Burkhard Consultant: Laddy Clark Address: 4250 West Wildridge Road George Harrison said the applicant is proposing a duplex as "avoiding a style of architecture that seems to be from another time or place, but one that feels at home in both Wildridge and in the Colorado Mountains." Mr. Harrison noted that Unit 1 is quite large, measuring nearly 4,000 square feet while Unit 2 is nearly 3,000 square feet. Exterior building materials will primarily consist of wood siding accented by square cut logs, red trim, and colored concrete to match the surrounding soils and rock. Planning & Zoning Commissic„ Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 8 of 12 The site faces west and is quite steep with slopes across the building pad of approximately 25%. Primary views are to the south and west. Commissioner Railton asked for some clarification about the siding materials and the detailing around the windows and door on the south elevations. She said she likes the style of a mixture of modern and New England Saltbox architect. She said the windows need some refinement. Commissioner Sipes said a model would help greatly. Commissioner Dantas said he the window elements are a big mistake, and that something should be done on the west and east side to this project so that it does not appear so massive. On the north unit, on the west elevation, where all the concrete is showing there should be stone work. Putting up a couple of boulder walls could help the situation. Commissioner Macik said in general he does not mind the design. The windows and the bow tie effect do not need to be done. He said the west elevation is one big wall of windows. Commissioner Sipes said the two buildings are incompatible. One building has haphazard windows and the other building all windows are in a row. The applicant is missing a huge opportunity for views. The two roof forms compete with each other. Commissioner Evans said he liked the project but materials to be used are not specific enough. Notes on the drawing call for 40 -year shingles but the color samples say 30 years. Motion: Commissioner Railton moved to table the final design approval for the proposed duplex on Lot 21, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, as depicted on the application and plan set dated January 13, 1999. Commissioner Evans seconded. Motion passed with Commissioner Macik opposing. C. Lot 41/43, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subidivion, Beaver Creek West Pool House Address: 288 West Beaver Creek Blvd. Project Type: Modification Applicant: Eric Hill George Harrison said on April 1, 1997, the Planning & Zoning Commission approved the remodel of the Beaver Creek West Pool house, with conditions. Staff discovered during its TCO inspection that the following modifications had been made to the project. 1. Gas meters were not placed upon the building as required by the conditions of approval. 2. Landscaped areas inside the pool deck area were not provided. 3. Security spotlights were installed that were not presented as part of the original application. Staff determined that these modifications require Commission approval prior to the issuance of a TCO. Staff recommended that the first two modifications be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That effective screening of the gas meters be provided, subject to staff approval. Planning & Zoning Commissic. ✓leeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 9 of 12 2. That a revised landscape be provided, subject to staff approval. Staff does not recommend approval of the proposed spotlights due to concern of potential glare and their incompatibility with the project's overall design. Eric Hill showed the Commission on a set of plans exactly what the changes were. He said the lights are motion -detection security lights and so are not on all the time. Mr. Harrison said the lights shined into the park, rather than down ward Commissioner Sipes said if it has offsite impact, he is not in favor of it. Motion: Commissioner Macik moved to approve final design for Lot 41/43, Block 2, Benchmark with the following conditions: 1. Effective screening of the gas meters be provided, subject to staff approval. 2. That a revised landscape be provided, subject to staff approval. 3. If the point source is visible offsite, the lights must come back to P&Z for approval. Commissioner Dantas seconded. The motion passed unanimously. VII1. Other Business A. Eagle County Housing Plan — David Carter Karen Griffith said the Eagle County Housing Plan has three additional policies. Mixed -used development; factory built housing, and the ongoing issue of an action plan for the County. Commissioner Evans suggested the Planning & Zoning Commission look at each item individually. The outcome of that discussion was as follows: 1. Approved 2. Approved 3. Approved 4. Commissioner Evans said it would be hard to do a tax credit housing project in this county because of the property cost. 5. Approved 6. Approved 7. Commissioner Evans said this item is too broad. 8. Approved 9. Approved 10. Commissioner Evans said that he would not encourage land to be developed for mobile home parks. 11. Approved 12. Approved Dave Carter said number 7 only applies to projects that have a land use development. Commissioner Sipes said that we need to have all kinds of housing for all kinds of incomes. Motion: Commissioner Evans moved to recommend endorsement of the Eagle County Housing Plan action steps 1-12 with the exception of number 7 and with the modification of Planning & Zoning Commissio. Meeting Minutes January 19, 1999 10 of 12 section 10, sub -item 2, to develop steps to encourage private ownership of land in mobile home parks. Commissioner Dantas seconded. Motion passed unanimously B. Lot B, Avon Center at Beaver Creek — Update Patrick Nook, of Nook and Company Architects and Planners, representing Shapiro Development, said it was requested that they do something to eliminate the hard edge of the tower using elements. Vary the arcade soffits, and put in the arches selectively and use other architectural treatments. He said they decided to do a stucco material with a rustic look and put notches in it to help soften to look. He said they have started introducing common elements throughout the building; reduced the mass down a level so you can clearly see the edge of the upper level; and the penthouse steps back 10 feet to get a good stepping back feeling. He said they were attempting to bring a ridge skylight back a little further and add skylights to provide more light to this corridor. Commissioner Railton suggested that they put a glass canopy in the entrance. Commissioner Evans suggested keeping the entranceway light and open to encourage people to come in. Commissioner Sipes thought that adding a canopy would help differentiate the opening here from the opening of the lodge (at Avon Center). Commissioner Evans suggested a covered entryway that comes out over the sidewalk. Commissioner Railton said she would like to see the penthouses embellished just as with the rest of the building. Commissioner Evans asked if they planned on integrating the colors of the building along with Avon Center and The Seasons building. Commissioner Dantas said he would prefer earth tones as to the pastel colors that he saw on their drawing. He asked where their parking would be while under construction. Ken Shapiro said they would be parking on Lot 61. C. Allowing Detached units on Multi Family Lots Karen Griffith said that Lot 111, Block 1, Wildridge, is zoned multifamily residential for up to 7 units. The owner, Andy Hadley, wants to build five single-family homes on the site. The Town's adopted policy, however, does not permit development of a multifamily lot in this manner. The Avon Municipal Code previously allowed construction of detached structures on duplex and multi -family lots through the subdivision process. In June 1991, the Council noted that replacing multifamily structures with detached units resulted in more structures on small lots, which they considered an undesirable change in the character of the Wildridge Neighborhood. In response, Council adopted Resolution 91-17, stating that the Town would no longer allow further subdivision of duplex and multi -family lots for single family or other detached units. The resolution states that "two unit lots would mean attached duplex buildings and no detached duplex allowed, and three unit or greater lots would mean multi -family attached buildings of three units or more per building." Planning & Zoning Commissio, ,leeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 11 of 12 On January 12, 1999 Town Council directed staff to draft a policy on this issue for review and comment by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and forwarding to Town Council for action. Ms. Griffith summarized the staff report, stating that there is merit in approving detached units in certain cases. Benefits of detached units include: • more compatible when surrounding neighborhoods are primarily single family or duplex • potential to lessen impacts on neighbors' views • potential to respond better to site topography Potential negative impacts to consider include: • the appearance of a denser development, with more structures and less open space • an increased number of curb cuts • impact on "affordable" housing supply by converting multi -family to more expensive single family units Motion: Commissioner Evans moved to adopt Resolution 99-2, recommending six criteria to be incorporated into the Planning and Zoning Commission Procedures, Rules and Regulations for use in evaluating requests for detached units on multi -family lots 1. The design would be more compatible with the topography, including minimizing site disturbance, compared with a multifamily project on the same site. 2. The number of curb cuts would not substantially increase. 3. The design would be more compatible with the surrounding development including character, density, and development pattern and lot size. 4. Impacts on views would be minimal. 5. Building site coverage would not increase. 6. Satisfaction of Design Review Criteria and Code Requirements. 7. Burden of proof rests on the applicant. The motion passed unanimously. D. Staff approvals Staff approved a color change for Lot 9, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision - Sage View Condos. Adjourn Commissioner Macik moved to adjourn at 11:25 P.M. Commissioner Dantas seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Respectfully Submitted Beth Salter Recording Secretary Planning & Zoning Commissio. ieeting Minutes January 19, 1999 Page 12 of 12 Mike Dantas Chris Anne F Paul Klein Greg Macik Sue Railton Brain Sipes