Loading...
PZC Minutes 020795RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 07, 1995 The regular meeting of the Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairman Jack Hunn at 7:30 PM, February 07, 1995 in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. All members present except for Bill Sargis and Buz Reynolds. Members Present: Jack Hunn, Patti Dixon, Sue Railton, Henry Vest, Rhoda Schneiderman Staff Present: Norm Wood, Acting Director of Community Development, Mary Holden, Town Planner, Sheila Kremski, Recording Secretary CONSENT AGENDA The following items were scheduled on the Consent Agenda: 1. Lot 1, Riverside Subdivision, Eaglebend Phase III, Modifications. 2. Approval of January 17, 1995, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes. Mary Holden described the Consent Agenda. Patti Dixon moved to deny the consent agenda and to further discuss each item later in the meeting. Seconded by Sue Railton and the motion carried unanimously. CONCEPTUAL REVIEW Lot 2, Avon Town Square Mary Holden stated the applicants request direction from the Commission on architectural style site layout. The first applicant present was Al Williams. Phase I of the project design was explained to be conceptually starting as a 3 to 4 story design with a building time frame from April P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 2, Avon Town Square (Con.'t) to November of 1995. Space usage was more toward retail and office usage. Interested in a signature type building with compatibility to Phase I but distinctive in its own right. Bill Parkhill and Bruce Ivans were also present on behalf of the applicant. Both described the project of Lot 2 as a Phase I and Phase II project. Phase I is on the eastern part of the site with a demarcation line between the two buildings. Phase II would be a slightly larger building to be built later next year. Phase I parking would be at grade in front of the building and parking below the building with a ramp on the east side of the project. 14,000 gross leaseable floor area would be available and the project would meet the parking requirements of 49 spaces with 28 for the retail and 21 for the office. The elevations design will be for more of a two story atrium with stairs and an elevator for the office users above and side walk access for other offices. In trying to keep the roof line lower the mansor style roof was suggested to preserve some of the view from the existing building toward the mountains. Building design was also wider due to the parking it sits over top of. Standard store front windows and a lower windowless south side are shown due to the noise from the railroad location on the same side. The parking garage ramp on the east side of the project will eventually be connected to Phase II to give one continuous flow between the project. More landscaping proposed rather than using retaining walls. Height of building is around 40 feet. The colors would be in the same range as Lot 1 with a lighter green roof. East elevation is the proposed sign area and maybe have a tower or a more integrated sign on the building. The Commission was concerned with the similarities between Phase I and Phase II as far as the architecture encouraging the two phases flow together. A first level shed roof was suggested for the pedestrian areas. The suggested plaza between the two buildings was of concern due to the location since it may not be very inviting to the public. The tower idea was viewed as an unimaginative solution to finding a place for a sign. The first story roof system is more attractive as well as more practical. Suggestions to stay with the cream and the greenish color pallet. A gable form of roof was encouraged to call attention to the entrance. The Commission requested the applicant submit information on the scale of the Phase II building to see how the Phases flow. Entrance locations are in discussion with staff for best locations. Lot 1 and 2, Nottingham Station Temporary Parking Lot. Mary Holden stated the applicants suggestion for a temporary parking lot. The applicant Lisa Dillon was present. A temporary lot was proposed to be used primarily for Vail Bank employees and other tenant employees of the Vail Bank Building. No transfer of parking for the Vail Bank Building was requested only simply to use the two lots for parking. A control device would be used to control those allowed to use the lot. 2 P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 1 and 2, Nottingham Station Temporary Parking Lot.(Con.'t) A gravel road base for the parking lot and using an entrance further away from the intersection Avon Road was at the request of the Staff. Commission review was concern with reason for the temporary parking and if the required parking requirements were presently met for the Vail Bank site. Ms. Dillon explained the need for the designated areas for the employees to park rather than having them park at the building site. The parking would also be offered to other employers in Avon to minimize employee parking in retail spaces. Phase I of Vail Bank is currently meeting its parking requirements but the future Phase II may be an issue. The Commission was mixed with the idea of a parking lot at that area. Without stripping, it may be easier for those using the lot to park straight in rather than at an angle. Circulation but no parking along the top of the retaining wall that retains the railroad abutment. A gravel solution was of concern due to the dust factor in the summer. This solution would require some dust control care. Snow storage was of concern also. A safe pedestrian crossing would be a suggestion for final review. A landscape plan would be strongly encouraged in the final design review stage. Eaglebend III, Revised Site and Building_ Plans. Mary Holden stated the applicant has submitted revised site and building plans which are in the Commission packets. Jeff Spanel was present on behalf of the applicant. Jeff returned to the Commission to explain the exterior of the western building. A roof line and some windows have been added. The applicant has addressed the concerns of the riverbank by removing two units and relocating them. The depth and length of the buildings have also been reduced by three to four feet therefore pulling back the setbacks of the buildings. The parking spaces width have stayed the same but the length of the parking spaces have been reduced to avoid designating compact car spaces. The management would be enforcing the parking. The Commission suggested the stucco on the upper elevations was recommended to be changed to siding. The shorter length of the parking spaces are concerned to cause problems in the winter with snow storage making the spaces shorter. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve Lot 1, Riverside Subdivision, Eaglebend Phase III, Modifications, with the following conditions: 3 P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Eaglebend III, Revised Site and Building Plans Con 't) CONDITIONS 1. Reduction in parking space size for 9 spaces on the east end and 12 on the west end to 16' deep by 9' wide. 2. Revised site plan with the reallocation of 2 units. 3. A 2 foot reduction of buildings "A" and "C" from the river. 4. Elevation change with siding be extended to roof line which is presently stucco. 5. All design changes be brought to staff for review and staff having the option to bring changes back to Planning and Zoning Commission for any further discussion and review. 6. Recommendation that the developers bring back a plan to extend the roof over the front door entry ways. Seconded by Patti Dixon and motion unanimously carries. Lot 22 Block 1 Wildridae Subdivision Duplex Mary Holden stated the applicant requests direction only for the duplex connection. The applicant, Mike Hazard, was present. Mike wanted to create a court feeling between the two structures and keep the plan very simple. The connection has a stone wall trellis and the downhill stairs connect from the parking area down to grade. Views are to the north and east with a large deck. The Commission was concerned about the mirrored image of the duplex and the location of the parking effect upon the neighbors. The general form of the project was complemented but since the project is a duplex it is important to make them different and not a mirror image. PUBLIC HEARINGS Lot 37, Block 2 Wildridae Subdivision Driveway Setback Variance Resolution 95-4 Public Hearing. Mary Holden stated the applicant has requested approval of a variance to the front yard setback requirements. The primary hardship being cited for the variance is site topography. If approved, the variance would allow for a small portion of the parking area to encroach in the first 10' of the front yard setback. Boulder walls are proposed in the setback, which is allowed as it meets all other requirements. Staff recommends to adopt 4 P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 37, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Driveway Setback Variance Resolution 95-4 Public Hearing. (Con.'t) Resolution 95-4, which approves the front yard variance request with the condition that the retaining wall have a finished surface. Michael Sanner was the applicant present. A minimum of 3 feet encroachment into the setback is requested. Chairperson Hunn opened the public hearing. No comments. Public hearing closed. Henry Vest motioned to approve Lot 37, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision, Driveway Setback Variance, Resolution 95-4. Seconded by Rhoda Schneiderman. Motion unanimously carries. Lot 3, Nottingham Station PUD Amendment Public Hearing Mary Holden stated at the January 17, 1995 Commission meeting, action was tabled pending further information for review. Additional information has been provided but staff was still recommended the item be tabled until further additional information is provided. Setback requirements of 30 feet from the mean annual high-water mark and the applicant was proposing 40 feet from the mean annual high-water mark. Deck projections or roof overhangs were not included so now the applicant is proposing 36 feet from the mean annual high water mark. The building height proposed have changed for Lot 3 it will be 48 feet and for Lot 4 will be 60 feet. The density has changed from 70 units to 69 at Lot 3 and Lot 4 from 72 units to 70. Parking is per code. Staffs main concerns is the proposed height of 60 feet on Lot 4. The 60 feet would allow for a vertical drop along the river corridor. The proposed building height of 60 feet with the proposed of the massing of the building there is no stepping away from the river and no stepping with the site topography which will create a canon effect along the river. Staffs question to the Commission is "is this appropriate along the river corridor and in meeting with our comprehensive plans, goals, and objectives pertaining to sub area ten river front district. Additional comment deals with construction and the cost and working out the Subdivision Improvements Agreement. Mark Donaldson was present representing Wintergreen Townhomes and Shapiro Development. The density of Lot 3 and 4 have been reduced. The residential square footage has been reduced to 215,000 sq. ft. The applicant proposes to reduce further to 206,000 sq. ft. to be allocated as follows: 1) Lot 3 - 69 Units ( 69,076 sq. ft.) 2) Lot 4 - 70 Units (130,725 sq. ft.) Total = 199,801 sq. ft. 5 P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 3, Nottingham Station PUD Amendment, Public Hearing (Con 't) On the north tract, Lot 3, the applicant would like an additional 1,000 sq. ft. to be approved (after rounding 69,076 to 70,000 sq. ft.). The designs being proposed are for zoning. No additional units. Used to enhance living areas at the discretion of the buyer. The riverside property, Lot 4, is expected to be a more calculated phase project dealing with the market and the buyer changes that come along with it. The applicant would like an additional 5,000 sq. ft. The river setbacks have been changed from 10 ft. to 6 ft. The moving of the building footprints away from the no build line was an increase from the previous approval. The building massing. Applicant feels both proposals do step with the topography. A low level walk out basement would come up to the entry level and the garages also come out at that level which is an appropriate step for this type of grade. Applicant feels it is a matter of perception. The building heights on all buildings range from 33 ft. to 43 ft. That was measured from grade. The 60 ft height was measured from the lowest point on the lowest floor on one end to the highest point on the highest ridge on the other end of the building. Chairperson Hunn opened public hearing. Michael Sanner was present to comment on the project. Density and infrastructure was a concern. Public hearing closed. The Commission commented that the applicant has repeatedly mentioned the comparison of this project to the former project. Building spacing was another concern due to its effect on river accessibility. Deck encroachment and patio design were addressed. The Commission stressed to the applicant the importance to protect preparing vegetation and river corridor during construction and beyond. Riparian areas were also discussed. The Commission requested the applicant to calculate the narrowest point between buildings. Chairperson Hunn agreed that the present project has a better strategy than the previous plan but still felt the building configurations were tight on site. Hunn suggested the applicant lose one more building to loosen up the site. The Commission requested the applicant come back with the building height for each building, setbacks with deck encroachments, changing the wetlands and the no -disturb P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 3, Nottingham Station PUD Amendment Public Hearing (Con 't) lines to include all wetlands area, the no -build and no -disturb line clearly stated, and would like to see no patios in the 40 ft. setback Rhoda Schneiderman motioned to table Lot 3, Nottingham Station, PUD Amendment, Public Hearing to the February 21, 1995 meeting. Seconded by Patti Dixon. Motion unanimously carried. FINIAL DESIGN REVIEW SIMODIFICATION Lot 37, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision Sanner Duplex Mary Holden stated the applicant has submitted plans for approval of a duplex a .75 acre lot. The site slopes to the southwest at approximately 27%. The duplex will contain two levels and varies in height, with the tallest point at 33 1/2' high. The Staff recommends approval with the conditions spelled out in the staff report. The applicant, Michael Sanner was present. Applicant present. I was unable to transcribe his comments Patti Dixon moved to approve Lot 37, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision, Final Design Review, with the following conditions: CONDITIONS: 1. The flues, flashings and vents be painted to match the color scheme of the building. 2. The building lighting be approved by staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Revegetation include native bushes. 4. Meters be placed on the building. 5. The landscape material be located out of snow storage easement. 6. Engineering concerns be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. The landscape plan brought back to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. 8. Resubmittal of cross bracing details to staff illuminating the visual crossbraing and substituting. 9. The applicant work with staff to add something of interest of interest to the south side of the garage wall. Seconded by Rhoda Schneiderman. Motion unanimously carried. P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 40, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Sanner. Mary Holden stated the applicant has submitted plans for approval of a duplex on .40 acres. The site slopes to the north at approximately 4%. The duplex will contain two levels and varies in height, with the tallest point at 27' high. Staff recommends approval with conditions listed in the staff report. Michael Sanner was the applicant present. Unable to transcribe. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve Lot 40, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Final Design Review, with the following conditions: 1. The flues, flashings and vents be painted to match the color scheme of the building. 2. The building lighting be approved by staff prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. Revegetation include native bushes. 4. Meters be placed on the building. 5. The landscape material be located out of snow storage easement. 6. The grading plan be revised to eliminate slopes exceeding 2:1. 7. Engineering concerns be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 8. Landscape plan brought back to Planning and Zoning for approval. Seconded by Sue Railton. Motion unanimously carried. Lot 42, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Loux Duplex Mary Holden stated the applicant has withdrawn his application. Lot 28, Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Modification Orcutt Mary Holden stated the applicant has requested his application be tabled to the next Planning and Zoning meeting. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to table Lot 28, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Modification, to the February 21, 1995 Planning and Zoning meeting. Seconded by Patti Dixon. Motion unanimously carried. Lot 14/15, Block 1 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Site Modifications Mary Holden stated the applicant requests approval of the following: * New location of north retaining wall; * North driveway location; P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Lot 14/15 Block 1 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Site Modif.cations.(Con.'t) * Northern driveway turning radius along with proposed contour information regarding north driveway grades and north driveway entrance grades at Metcalf Road; * Site lighting locations; * Exit stair locations; * Trash enclosure locations; and * Locations of building lighting. Staff recommends approval with the conditions listed in the staff report. Mark Donaldson was present representing the applicant. Mark agreed with Mary Holden's presentation. Rhoda Schneiderman motioned to approve Lot 14/15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Site Plan Modifications, with the following conditions: CONDITIONS 1. Revise grades on the south end of the northerly entrance per the Town of Avon Entrance Standards. 2. Revise the grades in the northerly parking lot entrance to reduce 14% grades to S% grades. 3. Detention limits in the northerly parking must correspond with indicated grades and detention volume requirements. 4. Redesign the drainage system to corresponds with required grading revisions. 5. Revise grading along southerly property line to carry drainage to street. 6. The building lighting be brought back to Planning and Zoning for approval. 7. Alignment and locations are based upon scaled drawings due to lack of dimensions. OTHER BUSINESS 1) Approval of January 17, 1995, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes. Chairperson Jack Hunn noticed the minutes were becoming more abbreviated and wondered if this was a deliberate direction staff was taking. Chairperson Hunn's understood in the past if "um" was stated it was transcribed. Presently the minutes are not stating the comments. Chairperson Hunn asked staff when they (staff) go to enforce the actions of Planning and Zoning Commission and this information's is not in the minutes anymore is it effecting staffs ability for reinforcement. P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Other Business (Con. Norm Wood stated the minutes have been shortened at his request. Formerly too much time had been spent on the minutes. Norm feels it clarifies the situation by having the action and not the opinions. It is the action the applicant acts upon. Rhoda Schneiderman requested including elevations in the packet and having the elevations posted on the council chamber wall for review during the meeting. Norm Wood noted that the Avon Rules and Regulations should be revised to define the submittal requirements. Rhoda Schneiderman motioned to approve the January 17, 1995 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes. Seconded by Sue Railton. Motion unanimously carries. 2) Duplex Connections Worksession Chairperson Hunn felt that debating Planning and Zoning Rules and Regulations in front of the applicant was not appropriate. The Commission needs to have a work session on duplex connections. Mary Holden scheduled a worksession for February 21, 1995. With no further business the meeting was adjourned at 11:30 P.M. 10 P&Z Commission Meeting Minutes February 07, 1995 Respectfully submitted, — 1 9 Sheila Kremski Recording Secretary Cc B. S. R. A. P. H. J. 11