Loading...
PZC Packet 0605181 Agenda posted on Friday, June 1, 2018 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, June 5, 2018 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. I. Call to Order – 5:00pm II. Town Clerk Swearing in of Commissioners Howell and Golembiewski III. Roll Call IV. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda V. Conflicts of Interest VI. Consent Agenda: Basecamp Residential Project Entrance Sign – 38359 US 6 VII. Major Development Plan – 254 Riverfront Lane – CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING File: MJR18005 Legal Description: Lot 4 Riverfront Subdivision Applicant: Jim Telling with East-West Partners Summary: Application to build one triplex and six (6) duplexes on the property to the west of the Westin hotel and condo property. Continued from the May 15, 2018 meeting. VIII. Workforce Housing Plan –PUBLIC HEARING File: CPA18001 Summary: Review of the Avon Workforce Housing Plan, with recommendation and findings prepared for Town Council final action. IX. Special Review Use – 228 and 238 West Beaver Creek Boulevard - CONTINUED 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 property’s Bed and Breakfast use in perpetuity. PZC asked for more information from the applicant during the initial public hearing. X. Minor Development Plan – 2011 Beaver Creek Point addition – PUBLIC HEARING File: MNR18014 Legal Description: Lot 111C Block 1 Wildridge Applicant: Tom Rummler Summary: Proposed construction of a garage, deck, and solar panel addition on the south side of the existing house. 2 Agenda posted on Friday, June 1, 2018 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. XI. Work Session - Sign Code Summary: Town staff will outline the process for updating the sign code, including moving it to Chapter 7, updating desired sign typologies, and properly responding to recent court cases. XII. Action on Meeting Minutes • May 15, 2018 PZC Minutes XIII. Action on Records of Decision • Major Development Plan and Alternative Equivalent Compliance - 4561 Flat Point • Major Development Plan - 4250 Wildridge Road West • Alternative Equivalent Compliance – 2290 Old Trail Road Fence XIV. Staff Updates XV. Adjourn fdxiugighiuyg Staff Memo – Sign Design June 5, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Project type: Sign Design Zoning: PUD Address: 38359 US 6 Location: Prepared By: Lot 1 Eagle River at Avon David McWilliams, Town Planer Staff Report Overview This staff report contains one application for consideration by the PZC: 1. SGN18003: Sign Design for a new “Basecamp” sign. This application seeks approval for one residential identification sign. Summary of Request Tommy Gregg (the Applicant) is proposing a new sign for the Basecamp. It is of non-reflective, three- dimensional individual gray aluminum channel letters projecting from the monument face of black. Review Criteria The Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing proposed designs: 1. The suitability of the improvement, including materials with which the sign is to be constructed and the site upon which it is to be located; 2. The nature of adjacent and neighboring improvements; 3. The quality of the materials to be utilized in any proposed improvement; 4. The visual impact of any proposed improvement, as viewed from any adjacent or neighboring property; 5. The objective that no improvement will be so similar or dissimilar to other signs in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic, will be impaired; 6. Whether the type, height, size and/or quantity of signs generally complies with the sign code, and are appropriate for the project; 7. Whether the sign is primarily oriented to vehicular or pedestrian traffic, and whether the sign is appropriate for the determined orientation. Staff Response The sign meets the sign code requirements for high quality construction, and the materials and sign design meet the sign code. The design is appropriate when viewed in the neighborhood context - a mix of apartments and rental condos. The sign complies with Avon Municipal Code regulations for height (approx. 4 feet), location (between the entrances), size (18.75 square feet), lighting (ground mounted lights, directed at sign), and materials (wood, metal, and concrete). Staff recommends approving this application on the consent agenda. Staff Recommendation for Case #SGN18003 fdxiugighiuyg Staff recommends approving Case #SGN18003 on consent agenda as it meets the requirements of the Sign Code and no public hearing is required for sign design review. Recommended Motion: I move to approve the consent agenda, thereby approving Case #SGN18003, a Sign Design application with the following finding: 1. The Application was reviewed in conformance with Section 15.28, Sign Code, and found to be in conformance with the design review criteria outlined in Section 15.28.070, Avon Municipal Code. Attachments (A) Sign Design Materials Attachment A 1 Attachment A 2 Gregg & Co. Builders upon approval GCB_basecamp.monument sign Set backs:ped/bike path - 7 ftproperty line - 22 ft Attachment A 3 June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 1 Staff Report – Major Development Plan June 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Case #MJR18005 Project type Major Development Plan Public Hearing Required Legal Description Lot 4 Riverfront Subdivision Zoning Planned Unit Development (PUD) Address 0254 & 0330 Riverfront Lane Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner Staff Report Overview This staff report contains one application for consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC): Major Development Plan with Design Review for six (6) new duplex houses and one (1) triplex home. At the last public hearing on May 15, PZC continued the hearing pending the outcome of a potential Alternative Equivalent Compliance application, and for some design related considerations, which are addressed in their applicable sections, below. The Planning and Zoning Commission will make a recommendation on the application to the Town Council for final action since the property is in the “Town Core.” All Major Development Plans on this site require final action by Town Council, which is currently scheduled for June 12. Summary of Request Jim Telling (the Applicant) with East West Resort Development proposes a new development on Lot 4. This application presets the first phase of a four (4) phase project. The seven (7) buildings within phase one are located between Riverfront Lane and the Eagle river. The primary access will be along a new one-way driveway. The four (4) buildings closest to Riverfront Lane are two-story on the street side and three-story on the driveway side. Similarly, the buildings closer to the river are two-story on the driveway side and three-story on the river side. There is one (1) triplex and two (2) duplex design types. Each unit is between 2,048 and 2,231 net square feet and include an attached one car garage. The buildings mainly feature shed roofs on the sides and a middle ridge, all at 2:12 pitch. The property’s PUD was amended in 2017 to allow for the uses proposed in this application, including a concept of 15 dwelling units in the current development area. The other phase footprints are outlined in page 1 of the application submittal (attachment B). Public Notice Notice of the public hearing was published in the May 4 edition of the Vail Daily in accordance with Sec. 7.16.020(d) of the Avon Development Code (AMC), and noticed for multiple meeting dates. Mailed notice is not required for this application type. Property Description Via the PUD amendment Lot 4 was reimagined by consolidating what was previously Lots 4, 5, 6, and 7, moving east to west. Preliminary plats were submitted as part of the PUD amendment and a final plat step is required to be completed before any building permits would be issued for this application. June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 2 The consolidated Lot 4 is 3.7 acres located along Riverfront Lane, generally from the cul-de-sac turnaround area to the beginning of the current Riverfront timeshare building. It is zoned PUD and accommodates the duplex and triplex development, per the PUD standards. The property primarily borders the Eagle River and large commercial-residential buildings. The Riverfront PUD includes overall dwelling unit and site coverage requirements that span the entire PUD; the following table demonstrates continued compliance. PUD Tracker Demonstrating Remaining Rights on the Property Planning Analysis Lot Coverage, Setback and Easements: Lot 4 has the following building envelope and easements: Front Side Back (Eagle River) 10’ 0’ 75’ Per the PUD Design Standards, the property is permitted, “limited minor encroachments as allowed in the development plan,” on the river setback, and decks are proposed to in this area. Distance Between Buildings Per AMC section 7.28.090(d)(2), “Building Separation. The minimum separation between residential buildings, including accessory buildings, is fifteen (15) feet. Architectural projections, such as decks, bay windows and roof overhangs, may project into the separation area, but may not encroach into required setbacks.” The revised site plan places all foundations fifteen (15) feet or further from each other. This design modification eliminates the need for an Alternative Equivalent Compliance hearing. In several places the foundations are placed fifteen (15) feet apart, and the building is cantilevered over, June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 3 thus decreasing the separation. For example, the east duplex and it’s neighboring building are overhung over the garage, creating eleven (11) feet of separation at the second floor. The intent of the regulation is to limit a feeling of over-density in an area, and to allow viewsheds. However, compared to the originally approved Riverfront PUD, this project’s limited density is conducive to defining the included overhangs under the “architectural projection” umbrella and allowing the design. Building Height: The maximum building height permitted for this property is fifty-five feet (55’) for “townhome” buildings, which staff interprets using duplex and townhome standards as applicable. The applicant is proposing a maximum building height of 46’ – 2” according to the development plans. Grading Plan The Riverfront property has always been conceived as a phased project. With the PUD amendment in 2017 the scale of the development changed, but the realities of phasing are still present. Staff received a “Phase I Grading Plan” that demonstrates the look of the land after project completion, with the assumption that the next phase may take years to be realized. Staff is satisfied with the result, which shows appropriate sloping off the internal drive and other areas. Design Standards Analysis The PUD has its own Design Standards, which are elaborated on when applicable. In cases where the PUD is silent, AMC standards preside. Parking: The fifteen (15) unit development requires a total of 18 parking spaces, and the applicant proposes thirty-three (33) spaces, which are provided in garages, spaces in front of the garages, and three (3) non-attached spaces near the driveway entrance. Projects with over 25 parking spaces are required Image of development site plan on Google Earth. June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 4 to provide bicycle parking facilities at a rate of one (1) bicycle parking space for every ten (10) vehicle parking spaces or a minimum of four (4) bicycle parking spaces. The applicant proposes three (3) bike parking racks (with six (6) total spaces) on the north side of the central river access path, thereby meeting the standard. Landscaping & Irrigation: The total landscape area proposed is 29,048 square feet, or 45.7% of the total area of the Phase I footprint. 580 landscape units are required, and 792 units are proposed, primarily of fir, maple, Cockspur Hawthorne, aspen, spruce, pine, several deciduous shrub species, native grasses, ground cover, and mulch areas (attachment B, Sheet 2). The applicant has not proposed an irrigation plan, and hydrozones are not expressly demarcated. The applicant states that the landscape plan has been prepared to meet the LEED Gold standard, therefore anticipates an intense focus on water conservation practices. Staff suggests that the application can be approved by PZC with the condition that a satisfactory irrigation plan is presented to staff. The application proposes the partial removal of native or established landscaping within the 75’ river setback. The applicant states that regrading necessitates the removal of certain trees, and that they will be replaced by native trees, grasses, and shrubs between the townhomes and the river. The recently planted large evergreens along the Eagle Valley Trail will remain. Further, the area has already been disturbed by prior grading and soils sampling projects. The PUD Development Plan states, “The 75- foot river setback will be largely left in its natural state”. Staff feels comfortable that removal of remaining flora is proposed to be done prudently. The Applicant states that no trees beyond those indicated on the landscape plan will be removed without the approval of the Town, and special efforts will be made to preserve existing vegetation. Staff suggests making this a condition of approval. The wetlands below the cul-de-sac are proposed to be preserved. Building Design, Building Materials and Colors: The primary exterior building materials are cedar siding (stained brown), and stone tiles (or stained concrete), cement paneling, and cementitious stucco (Attachment B, Sheet 6). Materials and colors were reviewed for conformance with the PUD Development Plan and determined to comply with the design standards. All materials are of high quality and compliment Avon’s built landscape. Since the first public hearing, the Applicant has revised some color and material choices to bring more character along Riverfront Lane and the Eagle Valley Trail, define the entries, provide a better building base, and provide flexibility for walk-out terraces. Retaining Walls: All retaining walls are proposed as boulder materials. There are three retaining walls on the west, near the cul-de-sac, and two small ones within the project. They are between four (4’) and two (2’) feet tall. Roof Material and Pitch: The applicant is proposing 2:12 roof pitches, which conforms with the PUD Development Standards. Materials are proposed to be asphalt shingles and standing seam metal, painted black. Snow Removal: The Riverfront property is responsible for its own snow removal, both internally, and along Riverfront Lane. Staff notes the need for a snow plan on the road side of the property and suggests its satisfactory completion with staff as a condition of approval for this project. June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 5 Exterior Lighting: The proposed exterior building lighting (Attachment B, sheets 6, 8, 10) are flat full cutoff sconces. The locations and brightness comply with AMC requirements. Recessed canopy lighting is also present on the structures, but the locations are not evident on the plans. Entrances: Three (3) buildings in the application are duplexes that front Riverside Lane. For duplexes, AMC sec. 7.28.090(f) states, “Entrances and Porches. Entry features and front doors to units should be the dominant elements facing the street. Entrances should be directly accessed and clearly visible from the street. Duplexes shall provide separate covered entries for each dwelling unit.” While staff recognizes the insular “village” nature of this development as a whole, the conflict with code is noteworthy. The layout of the project with downhill and uphill units addresses the sloping topography of the site, and the restriction for curb cuts along Riverfront Lane necessitate an internal street and walkway to provide automobile and pedestrian access to the proposed townhomes. This organizational framework led to the placement of inward entrances along the new drive. The materials and composition of the north elevation of each of the uphill buildings and the proposed landscaping, with a variety of plant types and species, are proposed to create a pleasant and attractive edge along the Riverfront Lane sidewalk while providing some screening and privacy to the homes. The Applicant has further enhanced the street side since the first public hearing. The triplex (townhome in AMC standards) does not have the same requirement, further pointing to the nebulous utility of the code section in the larger context of this project. Unified Design: The proposal includes three (3) design types for two types of duplex and the triplex. All three incorporate a level of syntropy or mirroring in design, however, it has been diminished since the first public hearing. AMC sec. 7.28.090(d) states, “Duplex, townhome and multi-family developments shall be designed in a manner that creates a single unified structure and site plan. Unified design shall include, but not be limited to, the use of compatible building materials, architectural style, scale, massing, detail, roof forms and landscaping. While "mirror image" units are not supported, the design intent should be one that creates a unified structure with enough variety and architectural interest to distinguish a duplex, townhome or multi-family structure from a single-family home.” Staff is satisfied with the level of modified detailing since the first public hearing, especially on the Riverfront Lane side of the project, that allows units to be distinguished from each other. Major Development Plan & Design Review - Review Criteria § 7.16.080(f), Development Plan 1. Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code as specified in §7.04.030, Purposes; June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 6 Staff Response: The Application is in compliance with the applicable purposes outlined in the Development Code. Purpose (f) states, “Provide a planned and orderly use of land, protection of the environment and preservation of viability, all to conserve the value of the investments of the people of the Avon community and encourage a high quality of life and the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality” View roughly from the driveway by the farthest east duplex in Phase I. The lower duplexes start behind the grove of trees on the left. 2. Evidence of substantial compliance with §7.16.090, Design Review; Staff Response: This Major Design and Development Plan Application should be assessed in part with the Design Review criteria of the Development Code. The Design Review section seeks quality development and structures that are visually harmonious with the site and the surrounding vicinity. Conformance with this code section is discussed below and in Staff Analysis . 2. Consistency with the Avon Comprehensive Plan; Staff Response: The site is located in the Riverfront District (District 2 in the Comprehensive Plan), which states, “Visibility from U.S. Highway 6, protection and enhancement of the riparian environment along the Eagle River, and appropriate public access along the river should be taken into consideration with all development.” Select district principles are elaborated below, with staff responses: • Seek easements where appropriate for river access. – An easement to access the river from Riverfront Lane was provided during the 2017 PUD amendment as a condition of approval. • Orient buildings to capitalize on the Eagle River as an amenity. Use sensitive site planning, architectural detailing, articulation, and appropriate setbacks, color, View roughly from the driveway where the lower duplexes start. The pink stake (to the right of the tree grove) represents the corner of “future B” and the yellow (above and to the right) represents the beginning of “TH C”. June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 7 screening, and scale of structure to preserve the character of the river and its associated natural habitat. – The scale and design detail of the buildings do not appear over dominant, and in scale with the river setting. • Limit building height to a scale that is subordinate to Town Center and compatible with the river environment. Buildings should be designed to step down in height as they near the river and in response to the natural topography. – The building height is subordinate to Town Center and the buildings step down with the naturally sloping topography. • Minimize the loss of trees and impact to the riparian area while achieving urban design goals. – The wetland area is preserved and impacts to existing vegetation is minimized. Other general Goals and Policies are listed below: Goal A.1: Promote a compact community form. Goal B.2: Ensure that Avon continues to develop as a community of safe, interactive, and cohesive neighborhoods that contribute to the Town’s overall character and image. Goal B.4: Encourage commercial development that enhances Avon’s overall economic health, contributes to the community’s image and character, and provides residents and visitors with increased choices and services. Goal C.1: Ensure that development is compatible with existing and planned adjacent development and contributes to Avon’s community image and character. Goal E.1: Achieve a diverse range of housing densities, styles, and types, including rental and for sale, to serve all segments of the population. Response: Staff finds substantial consistency with the form, cohesion, compatibility, and housing types offered in this project. 3. Consistency with any previously approved and not revoked subdivision plat, planned development, or any other precedent plan or land use approval for the property as applicable; Staff Response: The application was reviewed for the requirements that accompany the PUD Development Plan and the Avon Development Code, and found to be consistent with them. 4. Compliance with all applicable development and design standards set forth in this Code, including but not limited to the provisions in Chapter 7.20, Zone Districts and Official Zoning Map, Chapter 7.24, Use Regulations, and Chapter 7.28, Development Standards; and Staff Response: The analysis contained in this staff report addresses all applicable Development Code standards. 5. That the development can be adequately served by city services including but not limited to roads, water, wastewater, fire protection, and emergency medical services. Staff Response: The proposal is being reviewed by the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District for compliance with the property’s’ water allocation. Staff suggests that approval from the District be a condition of receiving a building permit. The Fire District had no additional comments and staff suggests their approval be verified before issuing a building permit. All other special services are well established in the subdivision. §7.16.090(f), Design Review Criteria June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 8 1. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; or, where redevelopment is anticipated, relates the development to the character of Avon as a whole; Staff Response: PZC should carefully consider the design of the Riverfront Lane-fronting buildings for compliance with this criterion. 2. The design meets the development and design standards established in this Development Code; and Staff Response: Staff has outlined any nuances regarding compliance with the development and design standards contained in the Development Code. 3. The design reflects the long-range goals and design criteria from the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other applicable, adopted plan documents. Staff Response: Applicable adopted plans include the Avon Comprehensive Plan, provisions of the Development Code, and the PUD Design Standards. The design has been evaluated for conformance with these plans and staff has determined the proposed design meets the requirements as proposed. Staff Recommendation for MJR18005 Major Design & Development Plan: Staff recommends a motion to recommend approval to the Avon Town Council Lot 4 Riverfront Subdivision Major Design and Development Plan with the following Findings and Conditions: Findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code and the PUD Design Standards; 2. The application is complete; 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; and 5. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community. Conditions: 1. A satisfactory irrigation plan that achieves silver or better LEED standards, and demonstrates square footage coverage and hydrozones shall be presented to staff before a building permit will be issued; 2. No trees beyond those indicated on the landscape plan will be removed without the approval of the Town, and special efforts will be made to preserve existing vegetation. 3. Temporary irrigation systems must be removed upon sufficient vegetation establishment, which shall not exceed one (1) year for ground cover, two (2) years for shrubs or three (3) years for trees. 4. The supply of water and fire services will be verified prior to issuing a building permit; and 5. The applicant shall provide a satisfactory snow removal plan on Riverfront Lane. Motion to Recommend Approve the Application: “I move to recommend Avon Town Council approval of Case #MJR18005, an application for Major Design and Development Plan for Lot 4 Riverfront Subdivision, together with the Findings and Conditions as recommended by staff.” June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting – Riverfront Property 9 Attachment A. Application Narrative B. Design & Development Plans  ZEHREN AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE  PLANNING  LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE  INTERIORS P.O. BOX 1976, Avon, CO 81620  970.949.0257  www.zehren.com    May 25, 2018      Matt Pielsticker / David McWilliams  Town of Avon Planning Department  Email: cmcwilliams@avon.org / mpielsticker@avon.org  Phone: (970)748‐4023    RE:  EastWest Partners Riverfront Village Lot 4 Phase 01 – Major Development Application  Response to Planning and Zoning Commission Review    Dear Matt and David,    Please accept this letter in response to the Planning and Zoning Commission comments we received on  May 5, 2018.  Our responses are organized by site and landscape followed by architecture, to align with  the order in which we presented the project to the commission.  The following sheets have been revised  and are included within the re‐submittal package:     Sheet A0.1, Project Information/ Index   Sheet C‐1, Utility Plan   Sheet C‐2, Phase 1 Grading Plan   Sheet C‐2.1, Overall Grading Plan   Sheet C‐3, Erosion Control Plan   Sheet C‐4, Easement Map   Sheet 1, Overall Illustrative Plan   Sheet 2, Landscape Plan   Sheet 3, Site Plan   Sheet 4, Site Sections   Sheet 5, Site Lighting Plan   Sheet 6, Uphill Townhome A (Plans, Elevations, Materials, Roof Plan)   Sheet 7, Uphill Townhome A (3‐D Views, Section, Exterior Light)   Sheet 8, Uphill Townhome A Triplex (Plans, Elevations, Materials, Roof Plan)   Sheet 9, Uphill Townhome A Triplex (3‐D Views, Section, Exterior Light)   Sheet 10, Downhill Townhome B (Plans, Elevations, Materials, Roof Plan)   Sheet 11, Downhill Townhome B Triplex (3‐D Views, Section, Exterior Light)   Sheet 12, Riverfront Lane Streetscape Comparison    Site and Landscape Responses:     Sustainable Landscaping: the proposed landscape is predominantly drought tolerant with  adaptable plant species chosen for each specific character area of the project, including riparian  plant species along the river, xeric perennials along the internal driveway, and shade tolerant  plant species along Riverfront Lane.  Dispersed and integrated storm water managements is  included in the plan via rain gardens in the landscape areas between driveways, where surface  Attachment A  ZEHREN AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE  PLANNING  LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE  INTERIORS P.O. BOX 1976, Avon, CO 81620  970.949.0257  www.zehren.com    run‐off will be diverted.  The proposed landscape plan has been prepared to meet LEED  certification and an irrigation plan with hydro‐zones meeting the Town’s code will be prepared  as part of the building permit application.     Drive‐way turning radii:  a specific study of driveway turning movements has been prepared by  Alpine Engineering using ‘auto‐turn’ software applying a large suburban vehicles as the test size  vehicle.   The study demonstrates the majority of driveways work dimensionally for the test size  vehicle.  In a few instances the study indicated the vehicle’s wheels encroaching into the  landscape zones and to mitigate this condition, 12” wide colored concrete edge restraints  around the perimeter of the driveways have been added to the plan, to increase the effective  area for turning and to serve as a transition and between the asphalt driveway surface and  landscape areas.   Also one driveway radius has been adjusted to provide greater clearance (the  driveway for the eastern most uphill Townhome).     Tree Protection and Removal: significant trees to be preserved and protected and non‐ significant trees to be removed are indicated in the landscape plan.  The Applicant will delineate  these areas clearly during construction with surveyor’s tape clearly indicating the trees to be  protected and removed.  In the course of utility and infrastructure work no trees beyond those  indicated on the plan will be removed without the approval of the Town, and special efforts will  be made to preserve existing vegetation.      Phase One Grading Plan:  a grading plan for phase one is included in the re‐submittal package  showing the proposed condition across the site associated with Phase One, and specifically how  the areas in future phases are to be graded in the interim condition before their development.       Architecture Responses:   Building Distances:  We have revised the overall Site Plan to comply with the 15‐foot separation  distance required between buildings.  We have chosen not to pursue an AEC at this time.   Differentiation along Riverfront Lane:  We have modified the materials and hues of the  following components to help add color and interest to the Riverfront Lane streetscape, along  with the other facades:  o Window cladding has been modified to a maroon hue, to complement the Westin  campus  o Stucco color has been changed  o Cementitious panel color has been revised  o Materials for two of the Riverfront Lane units have been altered, from cementitious  panels to stucco  o The landscaping along Riverfront Lane has been adjusted, to reduce the regular spacing  of the plantings     Definition of Entries:  We feel the entries for both the Uphill A Unit and the Downhill C Unit are  well‐defined.  On the Uphill A Unit, the entries are recessed and separated by an exterior privacy  wall; on the Downhill C Units, the entries are defined by flat roof canopies and timber columns.   In both cases, these form distinct “front porches” for the residences.   Protection of Wood Siding Near Grade:  We have revised the exterior elevations to indicate  metal flashing as a base material where wood siding meets the ground.  Another option we are  exploring is stone veneer in lieu of this metal base.  Attachment A  ZEHREN AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE  PLANNING  LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE  INTERIORS P.O. BOX 1976, Avon, CO 81620  970.949.0257  www.zehren.com     Full Cut‐Off Exterior Lights:  A new exterior light fixture that meets this requirement has been  selected, and included within the revised drawings.   View from River (Recreation) Path:  We have added stone veneer to the river side of the  Downhill C Units, to provide more richness and interest to these facades.   River Elevation Walk‐Out Terraces:  We have provided a study illustrating how this can be  accomplished.  As mentioned during the P&Z Meeting, this will be a buyer option.   Additional Decks for Units:  As mentioned above, the option for walk‐out terraces has been  provided at the Downhill C Unit.  We have elected not to provide additional decks within the  floor plans, due to construction budget targets and, in the case of the Uphill A Unit, the already  close proximity from Riverfront Lane to the units.    Thank you for your continued guidance and feedback during the review as we prepare for the Planning  and Zoning Commission hearing scheduled on June 5, 2018. Please let us know if you need any  additional clarifications and information.    Sincerely,                       Pedro Campos, RLA / ASLA    David Kaselak, AIA  Principal, Landscape Architect & Land Planner  Principal, Architect  Zehren and Associates, Inc.    Zehren and Associates, Inc.      Cc: Jim Telling, East West Partners  Attachment A Riverfront Lodge and Townhomes Riverfront Village Lot 4 Major Development Application Phase 1 Major Development Application Submitted: Lots 4| Riverfront Village PUD April 24, 2018 Application Narrative Attachment A Riverfront Village Lot 4 ‐ Major Development Application Phase 1 2 | Page    A. INTRODUCTION The applicant and owner East West Resorts Development XIV, L.P., L.L.L.P., a Delaware limited partnership registered as a limited liability partnership (“EWRD”) is hereby submitting a Major Development Application for a first phase of development of Lot 4 of the Riverfront Subdivision. This narrative accompanies the Development Plan Submittal drawings submitted under separate cover. Drawings include in progress coordinated architectural, site civil, and landscape plans for Phase One. This development application is submitted per the most recent amendment of the Riverside PUD, and is consistent with the amended PUD guide including the density reduction for Lot 4 and the design guidelines and site development standards of the PUD. This application is for a first phase of development of Lot 4 that includes (15) Townhomes. Additional phase(s) will follow to develop (4) more townhomes, a (36) unit, 4-story condominium building with underground parking, and (3) single family residences on the western end of the site at full build out. This application focuses on the particulars of phase one. In addition to the (15) townhomes this includes the development of the majority of utility, infrastructure and roads in Lot 4. The application includes some aspects of the complete project at full build-out to allow a coordinated review of phase one as part of the overall project framework. Sheet 1 of the Development Plan Submittal – Overall Illustrative Plan with Phase 1 boundary indicated (red dash line). Attachment A Riverfront Village Lot 4 ‐ Major Development Application Phase 1 3 | Page    B. PROJECT OVERVIEW Project Layout The project proposes a 4 story (36) unit condominium lodge at the eastern end of the site connected to an enclave of (19) townhomes immediately to its west. Primary access to the site is provided by Riverfront Lane. A 16’ wide one-way driveway with traffic flowing east to west internal to the project reduces the amount of paving on the site and serves as the organizing element of the site plan. An entrance and exit on Riverfront Lane is proposed for the drop-off and check-in area in front of the future lodge. The one-way drive originates at the lodge drop-off and provides access to the condominium garage below grade and to the townhomes to the west. (9) uphill townhomes and (10) downhill townhomes are located along the one-way driveway as it winds through the center of site. Uphill and downhill units have been carefully designed to maximize the views from the site to Beaver Creek and the Eagle River to and minimize conflicts between each other. (2) parking spaces per unit are provided including a one car garage and a parking space in the driveway. The project is specifically laid out to respect the 75’ river setback and creates a buffer of landscape between the proposed buildings, the recreation path and river. The project also respects the 10’ setback along Riverfront Lane and creates a landscape buffer between private residences and the public sidewalk. The project has a strong pedestrian orientation based on close proximity and very good pedestrian connectivity to the Westin Riverfront, to the Gondola, to the transit center, to the Main Street Mall, and to Nottingham Park. Attachment A Riverfront Village Lot 4 ‐ Major Development Application Phase 1 4 | Page    Pedestrian routes for the project include the sidewalk along Riverfront Lane to the north and the regional recreation trail long the Eagle River to the south. Internal to the site an at-grade concrete sidewalk along the south shoulder of the one-way drive will connect the site east to west. Two crusher fine pervious pathways wind through the property in the north south direction to connect the townhomes to the regional path below. The existing pathway next to Timeshare West connecting Riverfront Lane to the recreation path below is left intact as part of the development. Perhaps most important, a new trail easement is created by the project. A shared trail easement between East West Partners and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District is proposed at the western-most point of Lot 4 to be dedicated to the Town of Avon to connect Nottingham Park and Lake Street to the regional recreation path along the River, fulfilling a long- term connectivity objective of the Town. Attachment A Riverfront Village Lot 4 ‐ Major Development Application Phase 1 5 | Page    Above grade decks and at grade patios are proposed in each of the unit types to maximize the view and solar relationships of the site. Landscaping, with emphasis on adaptable and drought tolerant plant species, is proposed strategically in keeping with the Town standards to add interest and complement the architecture, soften the internal road and driveways, screen and create privacy, and serve as drainage and snow storage areas. Attachment A Riverfront Village Lot 4 ‐ Major Development Application Phase 1 6 | Page    C. DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Site Development Calculations: The total area of the site is: 161,180 sf. The total area proposed in Phase One is 68,210 sf or 42% of the total Lot 4 area. Phase One includes (9) uphill townhomes along Riverfront Lane and (6) downhill townhomes below the one-way drive through the site. The site calculations submitted with this application are generated based on the total area included in Phase One. The following are the major site coverage areas associated with Phase One: Total Lot 4 Area: 161,180 SF / 100% Lot Area Phase 1 Site Area: 68,210 SF / 42% of Lot 4 Total Area Phase 1 Building Footprint Area: 14,314 SF (21% of Phase 1 Site Area) Phase 1 Paved Areas: 19,175 SF (28% of Phase 1 Site Area) Phase 1 Landscape Area: 34,721 SF (51% of Phase 1 Site Area) Phase 1 Snow Storage Area: 5,645 SF (29% of Phase 1 Paved Area Following is a Development Summary for Phase One real estate development: Attachment A Riverfront Village Lot 4 ‐ Major Development Application Phase 1 7 | Page    D. PRE-APPLICATION SUMMARY A pre-application meeting was held on March 26, 2018 between the project design team and the Town of Avon Planning Manager and Town Engineer to review the path and process for the formal review of the Riverfront Village Lot 4 project by the Town of Avon. The discussion generally fell into (6) topics that were outlined in advance. Following is a summary: 1) Overall plan layout a. the general layout of the project and confirmed the one-way driveway as primary means of access and circulation. b. the general layout of pedestrian circulation was reviewed, and the existing trail along the east side of Lot 4 was discussed as remaining open during the majority of construction. c. Parking supply and distribution was reviewed consistent with the PUD requirements. d. The 75’ river setback was reviewed as a major influence on the layout of the site plan. 2) Proposed easements / easements to be vacated a. Existing easements were reviewed and confirmed. b. The sewer easement in the center of Lot 4 was discussed to be vacated and provided elsewhere in the project due to the project layout. c. A new easement for the trail connection on the west side of the property was discussed. d. The Town confirmed they have approached Eagle River Water and Sanitation District to discuss sharing the easement across their property in conjunction with East West Partners. 3) Phasing of project and permits a. Phasing of the project application and implementation was reviewed with a first phase of development focused on infrastructure, utilities, with development of approximately 12 to 15 townhome residences. b. A follow-up application for the condominium lodge building was discussed, and that it would include the full level of detail for the lodge units and building. c. The comprehensive review of the project was discussed as part of the first phase development submittal to ensure a complete understanding of bulk, mass, and density at full-build out. 4) Infrastructure permit a. A stand-alone infrastructure permit granted in advance of a complete building permit was discussed to enable an initial phase of site development during the summer months. 5) Final plat a. The timing of final platting of Lot 4 was discussed relative to the phasing of the project and development review and approval. The Planning Manager indicated the final plat could take place at any time during the process and would require both Town Council and Planning Commission review. The Final Plat should only take place once all easements are established. 6) DRB application & path of review a. The path and process for the Town’s formal review process was discussed, including a completeness submittal in mid to late April, and review process in May and June of 2018. b. The Planning Manager confirmed a Major Development Application application process and indicated Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council public hearings required per the Town Code. c. The Planning Manager confirmed the 10 day completeness review of the application once received and the review of the application by the Planning and Zoning Commission against the PUD design guidelines and development standards. Attachment A © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. east west partners 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomes 1OVERALL ILLUSTRATIVE PLAN PLANNING AND ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL - PHASE 01 Scale: 1” = 30’ 0 30’15’60’ FUTURE RIVERFRONT LODGE Rive r f r o n t L a n e Exist i n g R a i l r o a d T r a c k s Existing Timeshare West Condos Entry Exit Exit Ea g l e R i v e r Ex i s t i n g E c o - T r a i l TH A TH C FUTURE TH B FUTURE TH B TH C TH C FUTURE RESIDENCES Trail E a s e m e n t (ER W S D / E W P Prop e r t y ) FUTURE RESIDENCE TRI-PLEX A TH A TH A Phase 1 Site Area (63,521 sf) Total Lot 4 Area (161,180 sf) Note: Phase 1 Site Area is 39.4% of Total Lot 4 Area LEGEND Prop o s e d D r i v e w a y Existing PathBldg Type Gross SF / Unit Net SF / Unit Gross SF / Bldg Unit Qty. Total Gross SF Tri-Plex A (1) 2,533 2,048 7,599 3 7,599 Townhome A (3) 2,682 2,231 5,364 6 16,092 Townhome C (3) 2,497 2,127 4,994 6 14,982 PHASE 1 DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY Totals 15 38,673 Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. east west partners 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomes 2 NOTES: 1. TREE, SHRUB, AND PERENNIAL PLANTING AREAS ARE TO RECEIVE A MINIMUM OF 3" DEPTH OF BARK MULCH. 2. ALL DISTURBED OR RE-GRADED AREAS TO BE RE-VEGETATED WITH A NATIVE WILDFLOWER AND GRASS SEED MIX. 3. IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO BE MOISTURE SENSOR AUTOMATED AND TIME CLOCK OPERATED. SHRUBS, TREES, AND PERENNIALS TO BE DRIP OR MICRO SPRAY TYPE IRRIGATION. TURF AREAS TO BE SPRAY HEAD TYPE IRRIGATION WITH HIGH EFFICIENCY SPRAY NOZZLES. . 4. SILT FENCE OR HAY BALES ARE TO BE PLACED AT THE LIMIT OF CONSTRUCTION AS NEEDED TO PREVENT EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION. A CONSTRUCTION FENCE WILL BE PLACED AT THE LIMIT OF DISTURBANCE WHERE THE SILT FENCE OR HAY BALES ARE NOT USED. Scale: 1” = 20’ 0 20’10’40’ LANDSCAPE PLAN PLANNING AND ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL - PHASE 01 TH A TRI-PLEX A TH A TH A TH C TH B TH B TH C TH C Phase 1 Site Area (63,521 sf) Note: Native Seed Areas to have temporary irrigation for establishment (Native Seed Areas not Included in Irrigation Calculations) LEGEND Landscape Area Provided 29,048 SF 45.7% Phase 1 Site Area Total Irrigated Area 3,861 SF 13.3% of Landscape Area Spray Area (Perennials) 2,634 SF 68.2% of Total Irrigated Area Drip Area (Trees / Shrubs) 1,227 Sf 31.8% of Total Irrigated Area IRRIGATION AREA CALCULATIONS Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. east west partners 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomes 3 NOTES: 1. ALL DRIVEWAYS WILL BE ASPHALT PAVING. 2. NO SNOWMELT IS PROPOSED IN THE PHASE 1 AREA 3. ALL SIDEWALKS WILL BE CONCRETE PAVING. 4. TRASH CONTAINERS SHALL BE STORED WITHIN EACH UNIT. (NO EXTERIOR ENCLOSURES PROPOSED) 5. REFERENCE ARCH ELEVATIONS FOR BLDG HEIGHT AND ROOF LINE RIDGE ELEVATIONS SITE CALCULATIONS: Total Lot 4 Area = 161,180 SF Phase 1 Site Area: 63,521 SF Phase 1 Building Footprint Area: 14,310 SF (22.5% of Phase 1 Site Area) Phase 1 Paved Areas: 20,163 SF (31.7% of Phase 1 Site Area) Phase 1 Landscape Area: 29,048 SF (45.7% of Phase 1 Site Area) Phase 1 Snow Storage Area: 5,288 SF (26.2% of Phase 1 Paved Area) BUILDING TYPES UNITS PARKING CALCULATONS (6) DUPLEX 12 Units 2 Per Unit = 24 Off Street Spaces (1) TRI-PLEX 3 Units 2 Per Unit = 6 Off Street Spaces 15 Total Units 30 Total Off Street Spaces 3 Total Unassigned Spaces (On Street) 33 Total Parking Spaces Scale: 1” = 20’ 0 20’10’40’ SITE PLAN PLANNING AND ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL - PHASE 01 Phase 1 Site Area (63,521 sf) Protective Construction Fence (Limit of Disturbance) LEGEND Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. east west partners 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomes 4 Site Section 1 - West Site Section 2 - Center Site Section Key Plan NTS Rive r f r o n t L a n e Ea g l e R i v e r Lodge Timeshare West Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Site Section 3 - East SITE SECTIONS PLANNING AND ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL - PHASE 01 Scale: 1” = 10’-0” 0 10’5’20’ Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. east west partners 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomes 5Scale: 1” = 20’ 0 20’10’40’ SITE LIGHTING PLAN PLANNING AND ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL - PHASE 01 FUTURE RIVERFRONT LODGE Rive r f r o n t L a n e Existing Timeshare West Condos Entry Existing Street Light Exit Exit Ea g l e R i v e r Ex i s t i n g E c o - T r a i l TH A TH C FUTURE TH B FUTURE TH B TH C TH C FUTURE RESIDENCE TRI-PLEX A TH A TH A Bollard Light - Qty. (15) Street Light Bollard Light Street Light - Qty. (2) TOA Standard LEGEND equipment, etc. furnish by mechanical - refer to both electrical and electrical apparatus as shown on single line diagram and and mechanical drawing for scope and work and additinal infor- Complete connection of HVAC/Plumbing motor(s), water heater(s), Fire alarm system will be by electrical contractor. Complete provision, installation and connection of lighting fixtures, exit signs and lamps as specified and as shown on drawings. Complete branch circuit wiring required for the connection of emergency lighting and exit signs to existing emergency stand Complete feeder(s) installation as required for new and/or devices, new control devices, etc. for a complete lighting and including new panelboards, new conduits, new wires, new wiring Complete wiring system for new lighting and power as shown, contract. Electrical work shall include, but not limited to, these major as indicated on drawing and as specified, as necessary to complete the SCOPE: Furnish all materials and labor required to execute this work 2. 3. 4. 6. 5. Provide grounding and bonding Facilities. Complete all electrical demolition as required. mation. A. ELECTRICAL SPECIFICATIONS 1. drawings. by power system. and power system. b. a. items: A.Contractor shall submit shop drawings for engineer review and approval. Lighting fixtures. Shop drawing submittal shall include: Panelboard(s). CONDUIT AND WIRE:13. A. B. 2. 1. and contractor shall have written approvals from building owner prior Core drilling and patching of existing building structure required for Operating, Maintenance and identification instructions manuals, if electrical work. Core drilling shall follow Building Standard procedures Applicable codes: National Electric Code (2008) PERMITS AND FEES: Obtain and pay for all necessary permits, inspec- tions, examinations and fees or charges necessary for execution and and to the requirements of Federal, State or other City agencies Town of Avon Electrical Code, pertinent NFPA publications Conform to the prevailing edition and amendments thereto of the SHOP DRAWINGS AND SUBMITTAL: to start of any work. Test of entire system and work. REGULATIONS AND CODES: having jurisdiction. completion of electrical work. 12. 11. A. 7. 9. 8. 10. any. N. All cabling shall be bundled and properly secured and terminated. warranty period shall begin at the point of system acceptance or beneficial system during this warranty period at no additional cost to the owner. The free of defects of workmanship or products and will inspect and repair the from the date of project completion. The contractor warrants the system to be O. The warranty set forth for this system shall consist of a full three (3) years use, whichever comes later. enclosed within cable trays, raceways or conduit, as specified. engineer. Cabling shall be in the wall, above the ceiling or where exposed, M. No exposed wiring will be accepted unless approved in writing by the Care must be taken to ensure cables are not kinked, bent beyond limit, including NEC, EIA/TIA 568,569 and 606, and federal, state and local codes. familiar and install in accordance with all applicable codes and standards, L. All cable hangers shall be no more than 48" apart. Contractor shall be overloaded, over-cinched, crushed, improperly untwisted, etc. A. General Requirements 14. decora style. Finish per owner or architect. Convenience receptacles will be 20 amp, commercial grade Light switches will be 20 amp, commercial grade,B. ELECTRICAL DEVICES A. decora style. Finish per owner or architect. Provide decora style, finish per owner or architect. Dimming switches will be a minimum of 600w or as noted.C. 15. Support all electrical equipment independent of accessible ceilings as required by NEC. SUPPORT A. All mounting heights will conform to ADA guidelines. Typical receptacleD. heights will be +18"AFF and switch heights will be +46"AFF unless noted otherwise. 16. At fire rated wall space electrical boxes at opposite sides of the wall no less than 24" horizontal distance. ELECTRICAL BOXES A. When phone, TV & power receptacles are shown on plan next to each other. Locate respective receptacles next to each other on site with no more B. than 1" seperating cover plates. Provide GFI type receptacles at kitchens, bathrooms, garages, exterior etc. as required by code. E. H/P HEAT/PHOTOELECTRIC SMOKE DETECTOR ELECTRICAL LEGEND (NOT ALL SYMBOLS REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT) RECESSED OR SURFACE DOWNLIGHT WALL MOUNTED LIGHT FIXTURE RECESSED FLUOR. LIGHT FIXTURE SURFACE FLUOR. LIGHT FIXTUREAa Aa FIXTURE DESIGNATIONS: UPPER CASE - FIXTURE TYPE LOWER CASE - SWITCH DESIGNATION SHADING ON FIXTURE INDICATES EMERG. BATTERY BACKUP FLUORESCENT STRIP FIXTURE TRACK LIGHT AS NOTED OR SCHEDULED WALL WASHER POLE-MOUNTED FIXTURE POST (BOLLARD) FIXTURE CEILING OR WALL MOUNTED EXIT LIGHT EMERGENCY BATTERY LIGHTS DUPLEX RECEPTACLE @ 18" UNLESS NOTED DOUBLE DUPLEX RECEPTACLE @ 18" UNLESS NOTED SPECIAL OUTLET AS NOTED FLUSH FLOOR DUPLEX RECEPTACLE DUPLEX RECEPTACLE HALF-SWITCHED @ 18" UNLESS NOTED TELE-POWER POLE JUNCTION BOX IN FLOOR, CEILING OR IN WALL MULTI-OUTLET PLUG STRIP COMPUTER/TELEPHONE OUTLET IN FLOOR OR WALL CONDUIT RUN CONCEALED IN WALL OR ABOVE CEILING TELEPHONE BACKBOARD CIRCUIT HOMERUN CONDUIT RUN BELOW FLOOR OR GRADE CONDUIT STUB-UP - CAP & MARK LIGHT SWITCH AT 46" UNLESS NOTED SUBSCRIPTS: 2 = 2-POLE SWITCH 3 = 3-WAY SWITCH 4 = 4-WAY SWITCH K = KEY-OPERATED SWITCH TO = THERMAL OVERLOAD SWITCH P = SWITCH WITH PILOT LIGHT DIMMER SWITCH W/ WATTAGE MAGNETIC MOTOR STARTER DISCONNECT SWITCH TRANSFORMER GROUND PUSHBUTTON CONTROL STATION PHOTOELECTRIC CELL TIME SWITCH THERMOSTAT AT 60" UNLESS NOTED DIVISION 15 EQUIPMENT CIRCUIT BREAKER MOTOR OUTLET AUTOMATIC TRANSFER SWITCH FOOD SERVICE EQUIPMENT PC TS T ABBREVIATIONS - ABOVE COUNTERAC AFF - ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR - ABOVE FINISHED GRADEAFG - ALUMINUMAL - EMERGENCYEM - GROUNDGND - GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTERGFI NIC - NOT IN CONTRACT NL - NIGHT LIGHT NTS - NOT TO SCALE UG - UNDERGROUND WP - WEATHER PROOF XFMR - TRANSFORMER +18" - MOUNTING HEIGHT TO CENTERLINE OF DEVICE AFF OR AFG FIRE ALARM SYSTEM FIRE ALARM CONTROL PANEL FIRE ALARM ANNUNCIATOR PANEL FIRE ALARM PULL STATION ALARM HORN OR SPEAKER COMBINATION HORN/STROBE OR SPEAKER/STROBE THERMAL HEAT DETECTORH SMOKE/IONIZATION DETECTORI PHOTOELECTRIC SMOKE DETECTORP DUCT DETECTOR SPRINKLER SYSTEM FLOW SWITCH SPRINKLER SYSTEM TAMPER SWITCH STROBE SMOKE/FIRE DAMPER CONNECTION REMOTE INDICATOR LIGHT COMMUNICATION SYSTEM SPEAKER IN CEILING OR WALL VOLUME CONTROL AT 60" UNLESS NOTED MICROPHONE OUTLET IN FLOOR BOX OR WALL CALL-IN SWITCH PROGRAM BELL INTERCOM CLOCK AMPLIFIER TELEVISION OUTLET CONTACT DOOR SWITCH IN JAMB OR HINGE SECURITY SYSTEM KEY-OPERATED ACCESS SWITCH SURVEILLANCE CAMERA DISTRIBUTION EQUIPMENT SYMBOLS DISCONNECT SWITCH FUSES CIRCUIT BREAKER CURRENT TRANSFORMER TRANSFORMER METER CU - COPPER STEP LIGHT FACP M = MOTION-OPERATED SWITCH POP-UP RECEPTACLE - ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOREC - AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTIONAHJ - MECHANICAL CONTRACTORMC - PLUMBING CONTRACTORPC UTP - UNSHIELDED TWISTED PAIR - GENERAL CONTRACTORGC - REFERENCEREF THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE A WALK THROUGH WITH THE OWNER/ARCHITECT PRIOR TO FINAL ROUGHIN AS FOLLOWS: •CONFIRM ALL LOCATIONS FOR LIGHT SWITCHES; ADD THREE WAYS IF FOUND NECESSARY. •REVIEW RECEPTACLE LOCATIONS; MOVE AS REQUIRED. PROVIDE UNIT PRICING IF ADDITIONAL RECEPTACLES ARE REQUIRED. •REVIEW RECEPTACLE LOCATIONS AT COUNTERS AND CONFIRM IF THOSE RECEPTACLES SHOULD BE ABOVE COUNTER OR BELOW. MOVE AS REQUIRED. IN GENERAL CONFIRM POWER AND LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS. THE ELECTRICIAN SHOULD BE PREPARED TO REWORK SOME DEVICE LOCATIONS. SIGNIFICANT REWORK SHOULD BE FLAGGED AND UNIT PRICING PROVIDED AND WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS APPROVED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING. CONDUCTOR SIZES AND TYPES: For sizes #1/0 AWG and larger, use coppper THW or aluminum XHHW. For sizes #1 AWG and smaller, use only copper wire with 600V insulation, types TW, THHN, or THW - stranded in sizes #8 and larger, solid in sizes #10 and smaller. Control wiring shall be #14, stranded. Use type THHN for wires entering or passing through fluorescent lighting fixtures. All motors shall be wired with copper conductors only. UNO - UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE 48" WIRE PANCAKE. 10-TURNS OF #4 BARE COPPER GROUND PLATE (COPPER) OR TWO LAYERS #15 FELT 8x8 WIRE BASKET CONDUIT & WIRING #4 VERTICAL REBARS (6 REQ'D) NO SCALE POLE BASE DIAGRAM 24" DIA FIXTURE TYPE "LF-A" GROUND LEVEL 30" WIRE PANCAKE. 10-TURNS OF #4 BARE COPPER GROUND PLATE (COPPER) OR TWO LAYERS #15 FELT 8x8 WIRE BASKET CONDUIT & WIRING #4 VERTICAL REBARS (6 REQ'D) NO SCALE POLE BASE DIAGRAM 12" DIA FIXTURE TYPE "LF-B" GROUND LEVEL A 3/21/14 50% DD REVIEW B 4/4/14 90% DD REVIEW C 4/25/14 50% CD REVIEW Copyright © 2014 by Zehren & Associates Inc.C 5/9/14 90% CD REVIEW D 5/15/14 BID SET Submitting Agency:Description:3120 42 LED WHT53K MVOLT FT PL DSPFG Project:AVON ROAD STATUE & PED MALL - PEDESTRIAN MALL Notes: Type: LF-B ©2014 Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. 7/11/14 3120_LED 9144 Deering Avenue, Second Floor • Chatsworth, CA 91311 • www.hydrel.com Phone: 866.533.9901 • Fax: 866.533.5291 ORDERING INFORMATION EXAMPLE: 3120 36 LED WHT53K MVOLT SYM BL DESCRIPTION The 3120 BOLLARD is a low level area lighting luminaire that combines visual appeal with superior performance and unequalled quality. It is designed to work in building perimeter areas and public spaces completing a wide variety of architectural styles. Superior performance extends to the detailed finish of the louvers. Matte black finish of top surface provides IES cut off performance while gloss white on bottom extends reflective light to economize on spacing of fixtures. Custom finish available on top louver surface. CATALOG NUMBER NOTES TYPE NOTE: Hydrel Reserves The Right To Modify Specification Without Notice. Any dimension on this sheet is to be assumed as a reference dimension: “Used for information purposes only. It does not govern manufacturing or inspection requirements.” (ANSI Y14.5-1973) 3120 LED Round Louver Bollard Flat 3120 36 LED WHT53K Model Height LED Array Color 3120 36 42 LED WHT30K 3000ºK Color Temp WHT53K 5300ºK Color Temp MVOLT SYM BL Voltage Distribution Options4 Finish 1202 2772 347 MVOLT Internal FT5 Forward Throw, 180º SYM Symmetric, 360º BLS6 Bi-Level Switching (Motion Activated) GFCI3 Receptacle ELN6 Emergency Battery Backup (1000 lumen output) BL Black BZ Bronze DDB Dark Bronze DNA Natural Aluminum GN Green GR Gray SND Sand STG Steel Gray TVG Terra Verde Green WH White CF Custom __Z7 Zinc Undercoat (i.e. BLZ) Optional Louvers Painted1 ___/PL Louvers painted to match fixture (top only) The 3120 BOLLARD offers a patented impact resistant mounting and leveling design ensuring life long performance. Four leveling pads within the base mounting plate are easily accessible through the access panel. The leveling pads provide full contact with the concrete pad, providing a high degree of stability. The base mounting plate is fully welded to the bollard post, providing complete structural support from all directions, giving the bollard superior vandal resistance. Motion Sensing Bi-Level Switching (BLS option) is now possible through the use of a fixture-integrated microwave occupancy sensor. Mounted in the head of the fixture, within the sealed light engine compartment, the sensor is protected from moisture damage, as well as potential damage due to vandalism. The sensor provides up to 20’ of motion coverage in the 360 deg area around the bollard (see diagram on the next page). When motion is detected bollard will illuminate at full output (60 Watts). After approx 5 min, bollard will drop to 1/4 full output (15 Watts). MATERIAL: Copper-free Aluminum, A360. LED ARRAY: 60.3W (total system input wattage) Lumen maintenance of individual light sources have been independently tested to IESNA LM-80 standards. VOLTAGE: MVOLT 50/60Hz DISTRIBUTION: SYM Symmetric, FT Forward Throw. LENS: Frosted Borosilicate Glass. BALLAST: Integrally mounted LED driver with operating temperature of -30° to 60°C. FASTENERS: Stainless Steel. FINISH: See ordering guide. LISTING: CSAUS, CSA FEATURES & SPECIFICATIONS Specifications L:8” 203 mm W:9” Dia. 229 mm H:40” or 34” 1016 mm or 864 mm Notes: 1 Louvers will be black unless otherwise specified (top only). 2 Only valid with ELN or BLS. 3 Only valid with 120 Volt. 4 Options not valid with 50Hz. 5 FT not available with BLS. 6 ELN and BLS require 120 or 277 voltage, not MVOLT or 347. Choose only one. 7 Add Zinc undercoat for harsh environments. To p 6" 8" 9" Dia. 40" 34" 8" 36"LCL 30"LCL 9" To p 6" 8" 9" Dia. 40" 34" 8" 36"LCL 30"LCL 9" Top 6" 8" 9" Dia. 40" 34" 8" 36"LCL 30"LCL 9" THE LIGHTING AGENCY TYPE CATALOG NUMBER NOTES THE LIGHTING AGENCY TYPE CATALOG NUMBER NOTES CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY: Voltage: Colors/ Finishes: Ceiling Type: Specific Dimming Ballasts (if required): Row Information: Switching Options: Suspension Lengths: Other: DSPFG DSPFG -RUST Phase 1 Site Area (63,521 sf) Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 6PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 UPHILL TOWNHOME A - DUPLEX | 3BR UNIT Exposed Timber Structure 1/8” = 1’-0” ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” = 1’-0” SIDE ELEVATION Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Metal and Wood Guardrail Standing Seam Metal Roof Accents Metal Fascia Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific) Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) Exposed Timber Structure Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Metal Fascia Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific) Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) or Stained Concrete Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha) Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Channel Rustic Cedar Siding 1/8” = 1’-0” LOWER LEVEL FLOOR 1/8” = 1’-0” MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 898 SF (SALEABLE) 1,041 SF (SALEABLE) TOTAL | 2,231 SF 292 SF (SALEABLE) Metal and Wood Guardrail 1/8” = 1’-0” ROOF PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” REAR ELEVATION Metal Corner Trim Westin-Style Chimney Caps Westin-Style Chimney Caps Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone “Sebastian Sawn”) Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha “ ArchitecturalBlock™”) Channel Rustic Cedar Siding (Stained) Metal Corner Trim (XtremeTrim) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Composit Shingles (Timberline HD) Standing Seam Metal Roof (Berridge) +122-0” +111-0” +100-0” Existing Grade Existing Grade Existing Grade Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Proposed Grade Standing Seam Metal Roof (Berridge)11’-0”~+139-10”11’-0”~17’-10”~+137-3” +122-0” ~+131-7” +111-0”11’-0”~9’-7”~5’-8”Proposed Grade Proposed Grade Sconce +100’-0” DATUM = 7419.5’ ABOVE SEA LEVEL Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific “Harvest Cranberry”) Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 7PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 UPHILL TOWNHOME A - DUPLEX | 3BR UNIT NTS SOUTHWEST VIEW NTS SOUTHEAST VIEW NTS NORTHWEST VIEW 1/8” = 1’-0” BUILDING SECTION Existing Grade Proposed Grade NTS PROPOSED EXTERIOR FIXTURE Sonneman - flat box™ LED Panel Sconce 7” 6” 17” 2” 2 1/2” Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 8PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 Exposed Timber Structure Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Metal and Wood Guardrail Metal Fascia Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha) 1/8” = 1’-0” LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 268 SF (SALEABLE) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific) Standing Seam Metal Roof Accents UPHILL TOWNHOME A - TRIPLEX | 3BR UNIT 1/8” = 1’-0” ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” = 1’-0” SIDE ELEVATION 1/8” = 1’-0” ROOF PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” REAR ELEVATION Westin-Style Chimney Caps Westin-Style Chimney Caps 1/8” = 1’-0” UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 835 SF (SALEABLE) 1/8” = 1’-0” MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 945 SF (SALEABLE) TOTAL | 2,048 SF Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone “Sebastian Sawn”) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha) Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha) +122-0” +111-0” +100-0” Existing Grade Existing Grade Existing Grade Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone “Sebastian Sawn”) Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha “ ArchitecturalBlock™”) Channel Rustic Cedar Siding (Stained) Metal Corner Trim (XtremeTrim) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Composite Shingles (Timberline HD) Standing Seam Metal Roof (Berridge) Proposed Grade Standing Seam Metal Roof (Berridge) Timber or Steel Columns 11’-0”11’-0”~+139-10”~17’-10”~+137-3” +122-0” ~+131-7” +111-0”~9’-7” ~5’-8” Proposed Grade Proposed Grade 11’-0”Sconce +100’-0” DATUM = 7421.5’ ABOVE SEA LEVEL Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific “Harvest Cranberry”) Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 9PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 NTS SOUTHWEST VIEW NTS SOUTHEAST VIEW NTS NORTHWEST VIEW 1/8” = 1’-0” BUILDING SECTION UPHILL TOWNHOME A - TRIPLEX | 3BR UNIT NTS PROPOSED EXTERIOR FIXTURE Existing Grade Proposed Grade Sonneman - flat box™ LED Panel Sconce 7” 6” 17” 2” 2 1/2” Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 10PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 1/8” = 1’-0” LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” ENTRY ELEVATION 1/8” = 1’-0” SIDE ELEVATION Exposed Timber Structure Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Metal and Wood Guardrail Metal Fascia Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Exposed Timber Structure Channel Rustic Cedar Siding Metal Fascia Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) 622 SF (SALEABLE) TOTAL | 2,127 SF 1,037 SF (SALEABLE) 468 SF (SALEABLE) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific) DOWNHILL TOWNHOME C | 3BR UNIT 1/8” = 1’-0” ROOF PLAN 1/8” = 1’-0” REAR ELEVATION Westin-Style Chimney Caps Westin-Style Chimney Caps Existing Grade Proposed Grade Existing Grade+100-0” +111-0” +122-0”+122-0” Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone “Sebastian Sawn”) Fiber Cement Panel (Nichiha “ ArchitecturalBlock™”) Channel Rustic Cedar Siding (Stained) Metal Corner Trim (XtremeTrim) Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Composite Shingles (Timberline HD) Standing Seam Metal Roof (Berridge) Wood-Metal Clad Windows (Sierra Pacific “Harvest Cranberry”) Existing Grade Cementitious Stucco (Integral Color) Proposed Grade Proposed Grade 11’-0”11’-0”~18’-0”~+140-0”11’-0”~12’-8”~+134-8” ~+138-8” ~+4-0” Sconce +111-0” +100’-0” DATUM = 7411.2’ ABOVE SEA LEVEL6’-2”(146’-2” BLDG HT) Standing Seam Metal Roof Accents Adhered Thinstone (Telluride Stone - “Sebastian Sawn”) Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 11PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 NTS SOUTHWEST VIEW NTS NORTHWEST VIEW NTS NORTHEAST VIEW 1/8” = 1’-0” BUILDING SECTION DOWNHILL TOWNHOME C | 3BR UNIT Existing GradeProposed Grade NTS PROPOSED EXTERIOR FIXTURE Sonneman - flat box™ LED Panel Sconce 7” 6” 17” 2” 2 1/2” Attachment B © 2018 Zehren and Associates, Inc. 05.25.2018Riverfront Lodge and Townhomeseast west partners 12PLANNING & ZONING RE-SUBMITTAL | PHASE 01 RIVERFRONT LANE STREETSCAPE COMPARISON Uphill Townhome A - TriplexUphill Townhome A - Duplex Uphill Townhome A - Duplex Uphill Townhome A - Duplex Uphill Townhome A - TriplexUphill Townhome A - Duplex Uphill Townhome A - Duplex Uphill Townhome A - Duplex ORIGINAL STREETSCAPE PROPOSED STREETSCAPE Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B Attachment B June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting Comprehensive Plan– Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021 1 Staff Report – Comprehensive Plan June 5, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Project File #CPA18001 Application Type Comprehensive Plan Document Avon Workforce Housing Plan – 2018-2021 Prepared By Matt Pielsticker, AICP, Planning Director SUMMARY A public hearing is schedule for PZC to review the Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021. The plan will be presented by Willa Williford, Williford, LLC, consultant to the Town. The Planning Commission will provide a recommendation to the Avon Town Council, who will take final action by Ordinance after conducting one more public hearing. BACKGROUND Workforce housing has continually been emphasized as a priority by the Town Council. The importance of a proactive workforce housing program was reinforced in the 2017 Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, as well as the 2017-2019 Strategic Plan. On March 7, 2018 the Town Council conducted a Workforce Housing Retreat, facilitated by Willa Williford and led by housing professionals from Eagle and Summit counties. Chairperson Lindsay Hardy attended the retreat and learned about other successful workforce housing policies and projects in Breckenridge and Boulder. The purpose of the Workforce Housing Retreat was to provide data regarding housing need, review Avon’s current workforce housing stock, learn about successful workforce housing projects in other jurisdictions, and for Council to develop actionable strategies for the Town. Out of the Workforce Housing Retreat, a draft document was presented to the Town Council on May 8, 2018 for comments and to gain feedback and direction to finalize the draft. Additional edits have been made to the document based on Council’s initial review, and it is now being presented to PZC for a formal recommendation. PROCESS The Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021 is considered a Comprehensive Plan, as defined by Title 7 of the Avon Development Code. As such, Sections §7.16.020 and §7.16.030 of the Development Code outline the review procedures for new Comprehensive Plan “applications.” As mentioned, the Avon Workforce Plan 2018-2021 requires a hearing before PZC, recommendation to Town Council, and then two readings of an ordinance by Town Council. Staff will return to the June 19, 2019 PZC meeting with a formal Record of Decision and Findings of Fact, documenting the Commission’s recommendation to the Town Council. JUNE 5-PZC PUBLIC HEARING & RECOMMENDATION JUNE 26 -COUNCIL FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE JULY 10 -COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING & 2nd READING OF ORDINANCE June 5, 2018 PZC Meeting Comprehensive Plan– Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021 2 REVIEW CRITERIA According to Section §7.16.030(e) of the Development Code, the criteria below are to be used when evaluating the plan. The review criteria are included here for reference and to aid in formulating a Record of Decision and recommendation to the Town Council. (1) The surrounding area is compatible with the land use proposed in the plan amendment or the proposed land use provides an essential public benefit and other locations are not feasible or practical; (2) Transportation services and infrastructure have adequate current capacity, or planned capacity, to serve potential traffic demands of the land use proposed in the plan amendment; (3) Public services and facilities have adequate current capacity, or planned capacity, to serve the land use proposed in the plan amendment; (4) The proposed land use in the plan amendment will result in a better location or form of development for the Town, even if the current plan designation is still considered appropriate; (5) Strict adherence to the current plan would result in a situation neither intended nor in keeping with other key elements and policies of the plan; (6) The proposed plan amendment will promote the purposes stated in this Development Code; and, (7) The proposed plan amendment will promote the health, safety or welfare of the Avon Community and will be consistent with the general goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan. AVAILABLE ACTIONS 1) Conduct Public Hearing and finalize recommendation. 2) Conduct Public Hearing and continue to June 19, 2018 meeting. 3) Conduct Public Hearing and continue to a meeting not later than sixty-five (65) days from June 5, 2018. RECOMMENDED MOTION “I move to recommend that the Town Council approve the Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021, citing the following findings: 1) The Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021 complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan by strengthening the policy objectives related to achieving a diverse range of housing types to serve all segments of the population; 2) The plan complies with the review criteria outlined in Section §7.16.030(e) of the Development Code; 3) The proposed plan bolsters the purpose statements of the Development Code; Purpose (n): “Achieve a diverse range of attainable housing which meets the housing needs created by jobs in the Town, provides a range of housing types and price points to serve a complete range of life stages and promotes a balanced, diverse and stable full time residential community which is balanced with the visitor economy;”; and 4) The proposed plan promote s the health, safety, and welfare of the Avon Community by supporting working families and building a stable community with opportunities for families and young professionals. ATTACHMENT Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021 Avon Workforce Housing Plan 2018-2021 Prepared by Willa Williford for the Town of Avon “Avon’s vision is to provide a high quality of life, today and in the future, for a diverse population; and to promote their ability to live, work, visit and recreate in the community.” - TOWN OF AVON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ADOPTED MAY 23, 2017 Introduction The Town of Avon seeks to build upon a long history as a high amenity year-round resort community, strengthening its vibrant and inclusive community culture. The Comprehensive Plan sets the vision for a diversity of exciting opportunities for residents, businesses, and visitors. The current housing market, which offers very few opportunities for year-round residents to put down roots in Avon, posses a challenge to this vision. The potential community benefits of increasing workforce housing efforts include: • More housing choices; • Increased economic stability and a more active year-round economy for local residents and businesses; • Greater ability to retain individuals and families throughout life and career phases, strengthening sense of community, opportunity, and quality of life; • Further the goals of the Climate Action Plan by reducing single occupant vehicle commuting; and • Greater opportunities for arts and culture to thrive. The Need Since the end of the recession jobs and population have been growing much more rapidly than housing inventory, creating many challenges: • Frustration for employees seeking housing; • Employers facing unfilled positions, turnover, higher training costs, and lost productivity; • Precipitous increases in home prices, well beyond the means of most local residents; • Extremely low vacancy rates, resulting in limited choices and rising costs for renters; and • Negative impacts on individuals and families, who are spending a disproportionate amount of their income on housing, commuting long distances, and living in locations or situations that are not sustainable for the long term. Median price for all Avon homes sold in 2017 was $438,000. Condos accounted for 71% of these sales, with a median price of $358,500. The median price for single family homes, duplexes and townhomes was $850,000. The home price affordable to a median income family is less than half that at about $316,000. Only four homes were on the market for $316,000 or lower in early 2018. The rental market is similarly challenging: vacancy rates have been approaching zero, and since 2007, average rental rates have risen 48% across the Eagle River Valley. To meet the needs of local employees in the Eagle River Valley, over 4,000 additional homes will be required by 2020.1 In mid-valley, which includes Eagle Vail, Avon and Edwards, 1,500 homes will be needed. Subsidies or public/private partnerships are anticipated to be required for the majority of these homes to be financially feasible and affordable to local employees. Avon and the mid-valley are highly desired locations for local households. In a recent survey of Eagle River Valley households, 40% of renters and 39% of owners selected mid-valley as their first choice for where they want to live.2 Strengths and Assets Avon has numerous assets related to housing opportunities to build upon successes and lessons learned from previous housing initiatives: • An inventory of 670 workforce housing units currently, about 90% of which are for rent; • An Affordable Housing Fund balance of about $570,000; • A partnership with The Valley Home Store for monitoring and compliance of deed restrictions on for-sale homes; • Employee housing mitigation requirements for some new commercial development; • Successful PUD negotiations to provide deed restricted housing resulting in 63 perpetually restricted units to date. • History of regional collaboration with public sector, non-profit and private sector on housing issues; • Significant inventory of attainable free market housing; • Significant opportunities for development and redevelopment, with water rights, transit access and existing density on vacant and underutilized private parcels; and • Adopted Comprehensive Plan, which sets workforce housing as top policy priority. Goals and Objectives The Comprehensive Plan sets two housing goals (each with numerous supporting policies): • Achieve a diverse range of housing densities, styles, and types, including rental and for sale, to serve all segments of the population. • Coordinate with neighboring communities to provide an attainable housing program that incorporates both rental and ownership opportunities, affordable for local working families. Goals and Objectives of this Housing Plan are as follows: • Focus on increasing deed restricted homeownership opportunities at $450,000 and below (equivalent to 140% Area Median Income for a household of three people). • Grow the inventory of homeownership more quickly than rental housing, to create a more balanced portfolio, with a long-term goal of about 50% rental, 50% ownership. 1 Eagle River Valley Housing Needs and Solutions 2018, Rees and Williford 2 Ibid. • When considering new rental housing, prioritize price point, quality and amenities attractive to “step up” renters and seniors looking to downsize, focusing on the 60-140% AMI level. • Stabilize or increase the percentage of year-round residents; currently 55% of all homes in Avon are occupied by year-round residents. • Stabilize or increase the percentage of employees who live and work in Avon. • Seek to add at least 50 deed restricted units to the inventory during the plan period. • As sites redevelop, strive for “no net loss,” and when possible, an increase of housing serving the local workforce. • Review and re-evaluate goals and objectives in late 2021 or early 2022. Tools and Strategies In order to achieve these goals and objectives, the following tools and strategies should be pursued. Tools and strategies are organized into three categories: Housing Development and Retention, Funding, and Housing Policy. A timeline for implementation is included in Appendix A. Housing Development and Retention A top priority is pursuing workforce housing development on Town owned land. Two parcels, identified in the Town of Avon Properties Plan, are appropriate to move forward with workforce housing development in the next three years. These sites are Wildwood and Swift Gulch. This Plan is recommending that public outreach, feasibility analysis, and conceptual design for Wildwood move forward this year. Planning for Swift Gulch can begin when there is a clear path forward for finance, entitlements, and construction for Wildwood. Both sites are anticipated to be developed through public/private partnerships. Two strategies have been identified to preserve market rate attainable housing that is currently at risk of being lost to locals through rapid price increases and/or redevelopment. The first strategy is to “buy-down” attainable market rate units and preserve their affordability with a permanent deed restriction. Nearby precedents for this approach include Vail InDEED and Eagle Valley Ranch. This is a homeownership strategy. The second strategy is to secure right of first refusal on properties that currently house local employees. A right of first refusal creates the opportunity for the Town to purchase and preserve these assets, if the owner decides to sell and the Town decides the property is a priority and is able to secure finance timely. This is a mobile home and multi-family housing strategy. This program development is anticipated to begin in 2019. Investing in and maintaining the current inventory of deed restricted housing is an important component of housing development and retention. Much of the affordable rental housing inventory has recently been renovated, however, the homeownership inventory is in need of capital planning and reinvestment. The Town of Avon has recently contracted with The Valley Home Store to assist with compliance monitoring and re-sale of deed restricted properties. The next phase of this effort will be to conduct a capital needs assessment of the assets and make a plan for funding and implementing capital improvements. This effort is anticipated to begin in 2020. Cultivating additional public private partnerships and seeking to purchase additional land for workforce housing are additional strategies that will be ongoing. Funding Local funding is a key ingredient to building and maintaining workforce housing. Investing (or “leveraging”) local funds is essential to attracting the outside funding sources such as grants, loans, tax credits and private investments that, when combined, make housing development financially feasible. Currently, the Avon Housing Fund has a balance of about $570,000. It is anticipated that those funds will be invested in the efforts outlined in this Plan, and that additional funds will be needed moving forward. A two-step process is envisioned to secure additional local funds for housing. The first step will be to review current revenue streams and determine if additional funds can be directed to housing efforts through the annual budgeting process. This review will begin at the end of 2018. Depending on the outcome of the first step, the second step will be to seek opportunities for new funding sources, which could include approaches such as increased linkage fees, regional collaboration, and/or a local ballot initiative. Housing Policy The Town of Avon seeks to use both incentives and regulations to create a policy environment that is favorable for workforce housing. The Town has a strong track record in including workforce housing in PUD approvals. The Town will continue to encourage, and, in some instances, require workforce housing in new planning approvals. Initiatives to update and strengthen housing policies will include: • Review existing code for opportunities to increase the year-round occupancy of the existing housing stock, including consideration of short term rental, accessory dwelling unit, and lock-off incentives and regulations. • Update mitigation/linkage policies to be more proactive in addressing workforce housing needs. Current policies are limited to very narrowly defined locations and development requests, and the current mitigation rate is low compared with peer communities. • Consider implementing an inclusionary housing policy. Inclusionary housing was considered in the 2010 code update, but was not adopted at that time. Inclusionary housing is a tool to create housing affordable to the local workforce. It is recommended to look at inclusionary housing and mitigation/linkage at the same time, to better understand how the two tools complement each other, support policy goals, and maintain a level playing field for commercial and residential development. • Conducting a comprehensive review of fees associated with new construction including entitlements and water/sewer taps. This review will look at both Town of Avon and Eagle River Water and Sanitation District fee structures and will be a collaborative process between the two agencies to recommend updates. A goal of the process will be to align fees with workforce housing policy goals, as well as formalize a fee waiver/reimbursement process for workforce housing that meets defined criteria. The Town of Avon understands the regional nature of housing, transportation and employment in the Eagle River Valley. In pursuit of workforce housing, the Town will continue to participate in regional studies, seek opportunities to participate in regionally significant workforce housing developments beyond Town boundaries, and participate in employer forums, and be an advocate for other regional initiatives. Leadership and Responsibilities The work of furthering workforce housing in Avon is currently shared among several Town departments and outside partners. The Town Council sets goals, budget, workplan and adopts new regulations and approves or denies land use requests. Working on behalf of the Council, the Town Manager’s office is responsible for public/private partnerships, and long-range planning and strategy. The Planning office is responsible for existing and proposed inventory, PUD processes, permits and fees, and land use code related initiatives. Revenue sources, budgeting, financing and bonding are supported by the Town Finance Director. The Town contracts with The Valley Home Store for deed restriction monitoring, compliance, and sales of deed restricted properties. This structure is proposed to remain in place, with additional capacity contracted from time to time. These responsibilities are further defined in Appendix A. Investment Criteria As the Town of Avon seeks to deploy current and future Housing Fund balance to increase workforce housing opportunities, the Town will evaluate the opportunity based on the following criteria: 1. Does the proposed project meet the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and this Avon Workforce Housing Plan? 2. Does the investment fill a gap that would otherwise keep the proposed project from moving forward? 3. Does the project encourage resource conservation, energy efficiency and sustainable development? Does the location offer access to multi-model transportation options and other services? 4. Is there participation from other regional partners, public and/or private? APPENDIX A – Timeline and Responsibilities Lead 2018 2019 2020 2021 Longer Term Housing Development and Retention Town Owned Property #1 - Wildwood Conduct Feasibility Avon - Planning Seek Development Partner(s)Avon - Planning Select partner Avon - Council Entitlement and finance TBD Construct TBD Evaluate purchase of additional land for housing Avon - Manager Cultivate Public Private Partnerships Avon - Manager Develop a "buy-down" program Evaluate best practices from other communities Avon - Planning/TVHS Develop program guidelines for deed restrictions Avon - Planning/TVHS Seek right of first refusal on key existing properties Avon - Manager Town Owned Property #2 - Swift Gulch Conduct Feasibility Avon - Planning Seek Development Partner(s)Avon - Planning Select partner Avon - Council Entitlement and finance TBD Construct TBD Invest in and maintain existing inventory Conduct capital assessment of DR ownership inventory Avon - Planning/TVHS Funding Review Current Revenue Streams and evaluate fund contributions Include annual allocation for housing in budget process Avon - Finance Approve fund transfers Avon - Council Seek opportunities for new funding sources Avon - Manager Housing Policy Review Code Opportunities - Accessory Dwelling Units, Short Term Rentals and Lock-offs Assess current codes, best practices, opportunities to revise Avon- Planning Recommend code changes Avon- PZC Consider for Adoption Avon - Council Consider Mitigation/Linkage Updates and Inclusionary Housing Hire consultant(s)Avon- Planning Review current and previous ordinances and calculations Avon- Planning Analyze opportunities Avon- Planning Conduct outreach Avon- Planning Revise and recommend adoption Avon- PZC Consider for Adoption Avon - Council Formalize Fee Waiver Program Review Town of Avon building and planning fees Avon- Planning Review water tap structure with ERWSD Avon- Planning Codify requirements for waivers/reimbursements Avon- Council Participate in regional studies, site analysis, and employer forums Avon- Planning TVHS The Valley Home Store DR Deed Restricted ERWSD Eagle River Water & Sanitation District APPENDIX B – Definitions and Best Practices Topic Definition Best Practices Inclusionary Housing A percentage of residential units in new subdivisions/PUDs are workforce housing. Market homes support workforce units. Only effective if new subdivisions/PUDs are developed/ redeveloped. Carbondale, Eagle, Eagle County, San Miguel County Linkage/Mitigation Requiring new homes and/or commercial development to contribute to workforce housing relative to demand generated by the new construction. For residential, mitigation rate often increases with house size, and deed restricted units are typically exempt. Fees in lieu provides revenue stream that fluctuates with building activity. Documented relationship between fee and impact required. Telluride, Aspen, Mt. Crested Butte Fee Waivers Water/sewer tap fees, building permit or other fees waived in part or whole to reduce cost to build affordable housing. General funds or other source need to cover cost of fees waived. Breckenridge, Crested Butte Dedicated Funding Source Funding is a core component of building housing and running successful housing programs. Few programs begin with funding; rather finding funding is an incremental process that goes hand in hand with creating goals and objectives, developing policies, securing appropriate land for housing, and moving forward with public/private partnerships. Dedicated funding sources take many forms including grants, fee in lieu payments, taxes, voluntary assessments, proceeds from rents or sales. Summit County, Steamboat Springs, Crested Butte, Aspen, Telluride Public/Private Partnerships Partnering with developers to build homes, typically on publicly-owned sites, or using other public resources such as property tax exemption. RFQ/RFP process effective for selecting development partners. Ownership of land can be retained with long-term land leases. Eagle County, Vail, Breckenridge, Boulder Land Banking Acquiring land for eventual housing development when specific project is not known. Summit County, Vail, Boulder County, Breckenridge, Telluride Buy Down of Market Homes Usually involves buying down units with public funds. Deed restrictions imposed for permanent affordability. Inability to obtain condo mortgages can result in units being rented. Public sector purchases can drive up prices for low-end market units. Breckenridge, Telluride, Whitefish MT No Net Loss Policy Requiring replacement of housing occupied by the workforce when redevelopment occurs. Similarly-priced units should be replaced on site or another site, or a fee - in-lieu of replacement could be allowed. Boulder, Basalt APPENDIX C - Area Median Income for Eagle County 2018 Area Median Income for Eagle County, 2018 Household Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 AMI Classifications Extremely Low (30% AMI) $18,270 $20,880 $23,490 $26,070 $28,170 $30,270 Very Low (50% AMI) $30,450 $34,800 $39,150 $43,450 $46,950 $50,450 60% AMI (LIHTC max) $36,540 $41,760 $46,980 $52,140 $56,340 $60,540 Low (80% AMI) $48,720 $55,680 $62,640 $69,520 $75,120 $80,720 Median (100% AMI) $60,900 $69,600 $78,300 $86,900 $93,900 $100,900 Moderate/Middle (140% AMI) $85,260 $97,440 $109,620 $121,660 $131,460 $141,260 Upper (200% AMI) $121,800 $139,200 $156,600 $173,800 $187,800 $201,800 Source: CHFA Affordable Home Price Calculation by AMI, 2018 AMI % 30% 60% 100% 140% 200% Household Income – 3 persons $23,490 $46,980 $78,300 $109,620 $156,600 Affordable Purchase price Affordable monthly payment (30%) $587 $1,175 $1,958 $2,741 $3,915 Principal & interest (80% of pmt) $470 $940 $1,566 $2,192 $3,132 HOA, taxes, insurance (20% of pmt) $117 $235 $392 $548 $783 Mortgage Interest rate 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% Max mortgage $47,515 $175,030 $291,717 $408,404 $583,434 Max Affordable Price -5% down $92,000 $184,000 $307,000 $430,000 $614,000 Affordable Rent $587 $1,175 $1,958 $2,741 $3,915 Affordable purchase prices were calculated assuming that a household would have 5% for a down payment, and would qualify for a loan that 30% of their monthly income. HOA, property taxes and insurance of 20% where included. The max mortgage assumes an interest rate of 5.0%, which is about half point higher than prevailing rates for 30 -year fixed rate mortgages. Interest rates are rising, however, and will have a profound impact on housing affordability. A one-point increase in the rate, as occurred in 2013, would drop the affordable purchase price for a median income household by $30,000 to $35,000. June 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 228 and 238 Beaver Creek Boulevard Bed and Breakfast application Page | 1 Staff Report Case #SRU15004 Special Use Review June 5, 2018 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Introduction Todd Roehr (the Applicant) is requesting an extension of the Special Review Use (SRU) Permit given to allow a Bed and Breakfast establishment on his properties. During the original application process in 2016, PZC conditioned the application to be valid for three (3) years. Applicants are required to re-submit conditioned SRUs before the timeframe expires. This application would extend the SRU indefinitely. On the November 7, 2017 meeting, PZC was hesitant to approve the application with so little operational understanding. The business had only been fully operational during the summer, and PZC requested information from the busier winter season to base their ultimate decision on the ‘in perpetuity’ request. Now, the applicant has provided a new narrative detailing the conditions of his business and addressing the concerns of PZC (attachment C). Site Description The Properties are zoned Residential Duplex (RD) and according to the Avon Municipal Code (AMC) the RD zone district “is established to accommodate single-family and duplex residential development either as single neighborhoods of similar units or in a development with a mix of unit types. This district implements both the residential low density and residential medium density classifications of the Avon Future Land Use Plan and should be located along a local road.” Land Use Table 7.24-1 of the AMC refers Bed and Breakfast uses in the RD zone district to SRU process. Original Approval The original approval, partially included as Attachment B, conditioned the approval based on compliance with the building permitting process, and addressed specific concerns over parking and operations. Since approval, staff has not received any negative feedback regarding these concerns or any other issues relating to the Bed and Breakfast use of the property. By all accounts, the property is operating smoothly in this capacity. However, the property did not become fully functional until Spring 2017 and staff is hesitant to assume that all potential issues written as conditions in the SRU approval could have been realized at this point. Project type Special Use Review Public Hearing Required Legal Description Zoning Lot 37A and B; Lot 36A and B Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Residential Duplex Address 228 and 238 West Beaver Creek Boulevard Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner June 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 228 and 238 Beaver Creek Boulevard Bed and Breakfast application Page | 2 Timeline Avon Municipal Code Review Standards: • §7.16.100 – Special Review Use • §7.24.060 – Special Review Use Standards §7.16.100 - Special Use Review Special Use Reviews are regulated in AMC 7.16.100 and, “provides a discretionary approval process for special review uses that have unique or widely varying operating characteristics or unusual site development features. The procedure encourages public review and evaluation of a use’s operating characteristics and site development features and is intended to ensure that proposed use will not have a significant adverse impact on surrounding uses or on the community at large.” Review Criteria. The PZC shall use the following review criteria as the basis for a decision on an application for a special review use: 1) The proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and all applicable provisions of this Development Code and applicable state and federal regulations; General Comprehensive Plan sections relating to this application are found below: 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. Policy B.2.2: Promote a wide range of residential uses throughout the Town. The property is located within District 9: Valley Residential District. One Planning Principle was found to be related to this application: • Encourage high quality redevelopment consistent with the land use regulations. Staff Response: Staff reviewed the proposal according to the Comp Plan and Municipal Code standards listed above and found no conflicts. March 2016: Approval of SRU for 3 years June 2016: Mi Casa Building modifications Completed Spring 2017: Mein Haus Building Modifications Complete November 2017: Application for SRU in Perpetuity June 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 228 and 238 Beaver Creek Boulevard Bed and Breakfast application Page | 3 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; Staff Response: “Bed and Breakfast” is permitted as a Special Review Use in the RD zone district. PZC’s conditions from the original approval (attachment B) in 2016 should be reevaluated for compliance at this point. 3) The proposed use is compatible with adjacent uses in terms of scale, site design and operating characteristics; Staff Response: PZC’s concern with the site design led to the condition that all guest vehicles be accommodated on the property. The applicant has demonstrated that since opening, the parking area is adequately functioning for guests, operators, and service vehicles. With an average of 56% overall booking during the winter season, there was adequate parking and internal vehicular movement. 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; Staff Response: To this point, the use has had negligible impacts on traffic generation, lighting, noise, odor, dust, and other external impacts. 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 Staff Response: The Bed and Breakfast are currently served by all applicable utilities and services, including police and fire protection. 6) Adequate assurances of continuing maintenance have been provided. Staff Response: The applicant has expressed a deep commitment to continued maintenance of the property and the rules in place that provide an appealing Bed and Breakfast experience. For example, there is an on-site operator of the property. It is anticipated that the same level of maintenance and oversight of the property will be maintained into the future. Recommended Motion: “I move to approve Case #SRU15004, approving a Special Review Use permit for a Bed & Breakfast in perpetuity at Lot 36 and Lot 37 Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision together with staff’s recommended findings and conditions.” Findings: 1. The Application was reviewed in accordance with Sec. 7.16.100 Special Review Use and June 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 228 and 238 Beaver Creek Boulevard Bed and Breakfast application Page | 4 determined to be eligible for consideration with the applicable review criteria; 2. The application is complete; 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 5. The public services and infrastructure needed for this application is provided by current capacity; and 6. The proposed use is consistent with the purpose and intent of the RD zone district, and the scale of adjacent uses and activities. Conditions: 1. The owner shall ensure the duplexes are occupied with an operator; 2. The owner and/or operator shall ensure all guests, visitors, employees, owners and operators of the Bed and Breakfast park on-site; and 3. This use is granted to Mein House LLC, under control of Todd Roehr. Any change in ownership shall require reapplication for the Special Review Use permit. ATTACHMENTS: (A) Application description (B) Original Application site and floor plan (C) Seasonal Operation Narrative Mi Casa Favorita, Inc. doing business as Mein Haus Bed and Breakfast is making this application to the Town of Avon PZC for permit in perpetuity to operate a Bed and Breakfast at 228 and 238 West Beaver Creek Blvd, Avon, CO pursuant to Town of Avon Code 7.16.100 (f) and other applicable codes in the Town of Avon. The Planning and Zoning Commission (PZC) of the Town of Avon has granted permission for the above named business to operate a Bed and Breakfast at the above noted address, with full legal Description of the property as registered with Eagle County- Benchmark at Beaver Creek; Block 2; Lots 36A, 36B, 37A, 37B. The business has now filled all criteria previously established by any and all Town of Avon departments and oversight bodies and maintains good working relationships with all Town of Avon entities. To the knowledge of the owner, this is the only entity that operates a Bed and Breakfast in the Town of Avon having fulfilled all regulatory requirements, building code requirements, Eagle River District Fire Marshall and PZC requests. At this time, there are numerous entities using the title Bed and Breakfast, B & B, BnB, or BNB in the Town of Avon in various marketing and advertising formats without having gone through the process of approval from and satisfied the demands of the Town of Avon PZC, Town of Avon Community Development Building Inspections Services, and the Eagle River Fire District Fire Marshall. The owner has made a public plea to the Town of Avon Council to uphold the same requirements for all Bed and Breakfasts that the PZC has demanded and have been satisfied by this business. By going through the PZC process and obtaining proper approvals from all regulatory bodies, the owner believes that the PZC and Town of Avon has established a precedent for safety, oversight, respect for internationally recognized building codes that will provide visitors to this community a high level of quality, service and personal safety that establish the Town of Avon as an ideal place to find lodging. Furthermore, those entities that have not fulfilled the criteria set out by the PZC place this business and community at considerable reputational risk should one or more entities using the term Bed and Breakfast, BnB, B&B, or similar titles endanger the lives, health or welfare of visitors to the Town of Avon. Indeed, such an incident is known to the Fire Marshall, Town of Avon, and owner of Mein Haus where an unregulated short term lodging establishment endangered the lives of multiple visitors to the Town of Avon. Compliance with Rules, SRU and PZC Rules for a Bed and Breakfast established by the fire Marshall included placing off site monitored fire alarms, CO detection, and retrofitting a fire suppression sprinkler system in the buildings. This has been done and approved by the Fire marshall. The PZC also mandated that there be on-site parking requirements @ 1 parking space per rentable room + 1 parking space for operator occupant. Within the Mein Haus complex there are currently 16 rentable rooms with 18 marked parking spots on grade and an additional 4 covered spaces for a total of 22 parking spaces. There are 2 additional unmarked spaces on grade that can be used for service vehicles. Mein Haus is occupied at all times by at least one Innkeeper (as defined by C.R.S.) as an operator of the establishment, and the Town of Avon Community Development Building Inspections Services has certified confirmation of adherence to water, fire and building codes. Continuing maintenance and Attachment A,1 adherence to these standards is assured by the parent company, Mi Casa Favorita, Inc and its subsidiaries. The parking lot constructed by this company according to the guidance of the Town of Avon PZC and Building inspection department has actually become a thoroughfare used by many people as there is no other paved drive through structure in this part of the town. While having this structure used in such a manner may be construed as trespass on the part of those non-guests using the parking lot in such a fashion, the company has accepted that there is no viable way to prevent such use and has accepted such as a hospitable concession to the many guests, visitors and residents of the Town of Avon. Enc: Land Development Application dated 10/11/2017 Staff Report-SRU dated 2/12/2016 Avon Final Certificate of Occupancy. Landscaping. Electric Inspections for 228 W Beaver Creek 9.19.2016 Town of Avon Final Certificate of Occupancy for238 West Beaver Creek 6.28.2017 Eric Heil memo Re: Short Term Rental Oct 29, 2015 Town of Avon Town Planner letter for Bed and Breakfast dated 8/07/15 Attachment A,2   PZC Findings of Fact and Record of Decision: #SRU15004 Page 1 of 1   PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECCOMENDATION TO TOWN COUNCIL DATE OF DECISION: March 14, 2016 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Special Review Use Permit PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 36A&B, Lot 37A&B, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision | 228 & 238 West Beaver Creek Blvd FILE NUMBER: #SRU15004 APPLICANT: Todd Roehr PROPERTY OWNER: Meinhaus, LLC & Mi Casa, LLC These findings of fact and record of decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.020(f): DECISION: Passed with 3‐1 vote. FINDINGS: (1) The Application was reviewed in accordance with Sec. 7.16.100 Special Review Use and determined to be eligible for consideration with the applicable review criteria. (2) The proposed use has a negligible impact to adjacent uses and activities, including other short term rental properties immediately adjacent to or in the vicinity of the Properties. CONDITIONS: (1) The Special Review Use permit is valid for three (3) years from the date of approval and the owner shall be responsible for submitting for review and approval by the PZC a new application to renew the Special Review Use within six (6) months of expiration of the approved SRU permit. (2) The owner shall ensure the duplexes are occupied with an operator. (3) The owner and/or operator shall ensure all guests, visitors, employees, owners and operators of the Bed and Breakfast park on‐site. (4) Prior to commencing operation of the units, the following must occur: a. All parking spaces and landscaping shall be complete. b. Final written sign‐off from the Chief Building Official and Fire Department are on file with the Community Development Department confirming compliance with all fire and life safety requirements. c. Evidence of tap fee payment(s) to be provided to Staff. Attachment B, 1 Attachment B, 2 Attachment B, 3 Attachment B, 4 Attachment B, 5 Attachment C Dear David, As is widely discussed in the Vail Valley, secondary to snowfall patterns, the 2017-2018 ski season was challenging for Eagle county. Statistics widely reported overall come from the Vail Valley partnership and proprietary company Destimetrics which is also the source of Vail Daily and Vail Valley partnership reports. Internet based travel agencies have a broader data base to report from and the information coming from them tells that Colorado ski country had 2.9% decrease in overall bookings with 3.0% increases in average daily rates for overall flat year over year revenue this past winter. Being relatively new, Mein Haus had better year over year revenue comparisons, up 64% starting December 1. Peak month occupancy was 56% overall and advance Summer bookings look promising. Internet based travel agencies continue to separate Vail, Beaver Creek and Avon to the detriment of Avon lodging establishments. Package bookings where lodging, airline and car rental are sold in one price sequentially favor Vail over Beaver Creek and Beaver Creek over Avon on a percentage of bookings from package pricing basis. Free off street parking at Mein Haus continues to be a marketing advantage for us, as many guests actually check in early to take advantage of the free parking and shuttle services in Avon. Mein Haus has adequate parking and has not had any overflow situations since opening. There is a problem in Avon and the Vail valley for accommodating large truck parking. Comfort Inn and Sheraton have had numerous 18 wheeler vehicle guests park in the Town of Avon post office lot and Mein Haus is unaware of how Westin handles this problem as they seem even more constrained. If Avon made available parking for large trucks somewhere in the community, there is definitely a market for these travelers, especially with weather related road closures. Mein Haus has numerous contacts looking for such a service and we have gone off site to pick up several large truck operators who have had mechanical problems. 3 seasons ago, lower car rental prices at the Eagle-Vail airport could overcome the slightly higher airfares charged for direct flights over arrivals to Denver DIA. This is no longer the case. Also, despite regional financial incentives offered to airlines for direct flights to Eagle-Vail, the customers to Mein Haus are not seeing this in their direct flights from the Dallas-Fort Worth airport. Mein Haus guests report being able to fly round trip to DIA from Dallas for less than $300 while fares to Eagle-Vial run well over twice that amount. This requires the traveler to drive or obtain shuttle service from Denver that can be altered by road closures. When these closures take place, some of our scheduled guests get stranded in the Frisco/Silverthorne area or become discouraged and return to their front range homes from Boulder to Colorado Springs. Since, the alternating East bound closures usually occur in Vail and not the Avon exit, there is disproportionate loss of Avon occupancy when these weather related closures occur. An additional Town of Avon potential revenue loss occurred this past Winter with the addition of Traer Creek sales tax of 0.18%. Without a nationwide data base for local tax changes, Expedia has programmers and robots who search out local tax law changes and unilaterally alter tax revenues charged to their bookings. Mein Haus was able to identify a glitch in this system that started charging sales tax of 0.18% rather than the proper 4.0% and alerted Avon Finance department of the problem that likely affected all of the lodging operations in the community. Mein Haus was able to fix the problem in our systems before large detrimental revenue shortfalls affected us and the Town of Avon, but it is unknown to Mein Haus how the glitch affected Avon revenues outside of Mein Haus. It took Expedia over 2 months to fix the tax programming errors and Expedia bookings dropped in that interim for Mein Haus. The message for those involved in public tax policy is to be cautious when changing tax rates, as there are numerous outside factors that may work detrimentally to the intended increase in local revenue. I have directly and personally lobbied Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds and intend to discuss this matter with other United States Senators and Representatives who are in contact with me to institute a national data base to report changes in local sales taxes so that local taxing authorities do not lose out on the growing internet retail boom. Municipal and county road budgets depend on these sources of revenue that are currently fragile. Attachment C As Mein Haus Bed and Breakfast staff tend to interact more closely with our guests than other lodging formats, we have learned that Avon has a very special location that we believe has not been leveraged to date. Many of our guests stay here overnight and then for longer periods of time because of Avon's unique locations at the western edge of the Rockies. Going forward, Mein Haus marketing efforts plan to emphasize "Center of the Rockies" and "Heart of the Rockies" motifs. We have had many guests tell us they looked at a map to see where to stay and thought that Avon was in the middle of the sights they wanted to see. Avon is perceived to be West of the potential snow related road troubles when West bound and at the foot of the Mountains when East bound tourists want to go sight seeing and choose to stop so that they can see the mountains when the Sun comes up the next day. Another idea that Mein Haus wants to bring up to the PZC is that the unused real estate in Chapel Square would make an ideal location for small convention type destinations. There are a plethora of medical specialties, professional organizations, finance, etc that look for teaching or meeting space for less than 100 guests. If Avon could use the space, it could be advantageous to get people to stay in Avon, and spend their money in our town rather than the resort areas that Avon is excluded from in with other marketing ventures and internet based travel agencies. As you can see from the above discussions, Mein Haus has every intention of being a lodging destination in the far future. Our thought processes are geared toward long range and global planning with attention to the broader benefit of Avon and Eagle county. These plans will likely take long periods of time and effort to execute. This is one of the reasons Mein Haus asks the PZC to extend the licensing of this unique lodging venue out as far as possible. Todd Roehr, Manager 563-343-3263 cell 970-949-4287 www.MeinHausUSA.com 2011 Beaver Creek Point - Development Plan 1 Staff Report – Minor Development Plan June 5, 2018 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Case #MNR18014 Staff Report Overview This staff report contains one application for consideration by the PZC: Minor Development Plan with Design Review for a proposed garage (or storage area), deck, and solar array. Summary of Request Tom Ruemmler (the Applicant) proposes a new garage (or storage area), a deck, and a solar array above. This will meet several of his future needs for space and the desire to largely disconnect from the electricity grid. The idea behind the project is to be close to grid-neutral and create more space for changing living situations. Staff finds this project a worthy attempt at solving many of the long-term concerns of the applicant. Additional parking for caregivers, and the ability to go “off-grid” are practical elements of creating a house for aging in place, but staff is concerned that the scale of development is incompatible with the code and the neighborhood as outlined herein. Public Notice Notice of the public hearing was published in the May 25 edition of the Vail Daily in accordance with Sec. 7.16.020(d) of the Avon Development Code. Mailed notice is not required for this application type. Property Description The Beaver Creek Point PUD is divided into five (5) single family lots accessed by a common shared driveway off Beaver Creek Point Road. The applicant’s house is on the street side of the development, and is the first house on the shared driveway. Planning Analysis Allowed Use and Density: The property is zoned PUD on 9,691 square feet and is permitted one house with 4,241 square feet of building lot coverage. Lot Coverage, Setback and Easements: The applicant’s home currently covers 43% of the property Project type Minor Development Plan Public Hearing Elected by the Planning Director Legal Description Lot 111C Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Zoning Planned Unit Development (PUD) Address 2011 Beaver Creek Point Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner Aerial Vicinity Map of the Property and Beaver Creek Point PUD 2011 Beaver Creek Point - Development Plan 2 and is permitted to cover 50%. The proposal would increase the coverage to approximately 47% of the property. The proposal approaches the setbacks on three (3) sides. Lot 111C Setbacks: Front: twenty- five (25) feet; Side: ten (10) feet; Rear: from driveway, as shown on plans (Attachment A, page 2). An ILC would be necessary at construction to verify compliance with setbacks. Building Height: The maximum building height permitted for this property is thirty feet (30'). The applicant is proposing a maximum project height of twenty-seven (27) feet. An ILC would be necessary at construction to verify compliance with setbacks. Design Standards Analysis Landscaping: The proposed addition primarily occupies grass area. No replacement vegetation is proposed. The property would still meet the minimum 25% required landscape area. In 2017, an application to remove “significant trees” was presented to staff. At that time, staff’s approval required the planting of three (3) 15-gallon shrubs roughly in the location of this proposal. Building Design, Building Materials and Colors: The primary exterior building materials are proposed to be wood siding, painted to match the current house. The railing design is proposed to be the same as existing. Roof Material and Pitch: The roof is proposed to be the solar panel array. While roof-mounted solar panels are expressly permitted by code, the alternative energy code section (7.28.100(g)) only distinguishes between roof-mounted and ground-mounted solar panels. Staff is concerned that the solar panel roof material alone is reflective, and PZC should carefully weigh whether or not the proposal violates section 7.28.090(d)(3)(iii), which states, “Large expanses of bright, reflective materials are not permitted; however, standing seam metal, copper or weathering steel (corten) may be acceptable.” The applicant states that the proposed panels could be mounted on a roof structure, but that would be an unnecessary expense for the project. The pitch of the roof is compliant with design standards, at 7:12. View of the area proposed to hold a new garage, deck, and solar array. 2011 Beaver Creek Point - Development Plan 3 Four-Sided Design: Section 7.28.090(d)(5) states, “All sides of a residential building shall display a similar level of quality and architectural detailing. Architectural features and treatments shall not be restricted to a single facade.” Staff’s review concludes that the proposal violates this code section and is therefore suggesting denial of the application. The overhang above the existing gabled roof is one concern. The overhang extends roughly five (5) feet from the edge of the gable over the house, creating an unpleasant house profile as compared to other properties in the vicinity. The “ceiling” height at the southern edge of the balcony appears to be roughly six (6) feet, and slopes further down at a 7:12 pitch for another one and one half (1 - ½) feet. An unscientific internet search of “minimum roof height on deck” yielded an answer of six feet – eight inches (6’ – 8”), the same height as a standard door. Staff does not feel that these elements compliment the architectural detailing of the rest of the house, made up of steep gabled roofs with wood shingles. Design in Wildridge: Code section 7.28.090(e)(3)(i)(B) states, “The use of architectural features that increase visual prominence should be avoided. Massive, tall elements, such as two-story entries, turrets and large chimneys, should be avoided. Such elements on the downhill face of the structure are of particular concern.” Staff is concerned that this addition, while lower than the maximum allowed height, will increase visual prominence, especially the portion that extends and overhangs above the existing gabled roof as seen on the “West” and “Rear” building elevation drawings. This proposal is on the downhill side of the house, further raising concerns with prominence. Exterior Lighting: No exterior lighting is proposed for the project. Garages: Code section 7.28.030(12)(ii) states, “Individual driveways leading from the shared court drive lane to each dwelling unit shall be at least twenty (20) feet long, as measured between the front of the garage and the closest edge of the shared drive lane or sidewalk if one exists.” Staff estimated the distance to be less than twenty (20) feet long, therefore in violation of this section. The applicant has suggested that the enclosure can simply be a storage shed instead of a garage, but no plans showing this have been presented. Alternatively, the applicant proposes the garage door on the street side, with a driveway extending from Beaver Creek Point to the garage (Attachment A, page 6). This proposal was received and rejected by the town engineer, Justin Hildreth due to the combined driveway’s street cut size and safety concerns. Minor Development Plan & Design Review - Review Criteria § 7.16.080(f), Development Plan 1. Evidence of substantial compliance with the purpose of the Development Code as specified in §7.04.030, Purposes; Staff Response: The Application should be assessed for compliance with the P urposes outlined in the Development Code. Of concern is (l), which states, “Promote architectural design which is compatible, functional, practical and complimentary checking to Avon's sub-alpine environment.” Staff does not debate the merits of additional solar panels on a house, but finds the scale incompatible with the neighborhood, the deck unfunctional for enjoyment, and size of the array impractical given the limitations on the south side of the house. 2011 Beaver Creek Point - Development Plan 4 2. Evidence of substantial compliance with §7.16.090, Design Review; Staff Response: This Minor Design and Development Plan Application should be assessed for compliance with the Design Review criteria of the Development Code. The Design Review section seeks quality development and structures that are visually harmonious with their site and surrounding vicinity. Conformance with this code section is discussed below and in Staff Analysis . The potential deviations from the Development Code are concerning. 3. Consistency with the Avon Comprehensive Plan; Staff Response: The site is located in the Northern Residential District (District 11 of the Comprehensive Plan), which states in its overview, “due to the limited number of existing trees and shrubs and the open character of the property, special care should be taken to ensure that all structures are compatible with one another and in harmony with the natural surroundings.” This district includes Planning Principles that encourage open space preservation, sidewalks, and to, “encourage and support development that: • Prohibits significant alteration of natural environment as well as ridgeline and steep slope development. This area should be highly sensitive to visual impacts of improvements, wildlife preservation, and lighting.” Other Applicable excerpts from the Goals and Policies section including: Policy C.1.2: Ensure compatible architectural features between adjacent buildings. Response: Staff is concerned that the scale of the project will create visual disharmony in the area, be visually impactful, and not be architecturally compatible. 4. Consistency with any previously approved and not revoked subdivision plat, planned development, or any other precedent plan or land use approval for the property as applicable; Staff Response: The application may be considered out of conformance the requirements of the PUD zoning and the Development Code. 5. Compliance with all applicable development and design standards set forth in this Code, including but not limited to the provisions in Chapter 7.20, Zone Districts and Official Zoning Map, Chapter 7.24, Use Regulations, and Chapter 7.28, Development Standards; and Staff Response: The analysis contained in this staff report addresses all applicable Development Code standards. 6. That the development can be adequately served by city services including but not limited to roads, water, wastewater, fire protection, and emergency medical services. Staff Response: The proposed addition could be served by all applicable services. Prior to issuance of a building permit, staff would like a re-affirmation from the fire department of the acceptability of this design. That is, on roofs, the Fire department is requiring a three (3) foot gap between the edge of the roof and the beginning of a panel, for adequate access. It would be prudent to have this project’s unique design assessed before being built. §7.16.090(f), Design Review 1. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; or, where redevelopment is anticipated, relates the development to the character of Avon 2011 Beaver Creek Point - Development Plan 5 as a whole; Staff Response: The Application proposes a design that largely deviates from the character of the surrounding community. The houses in the Beaver Creek PUD have mostly gabled roof forms, open decks, and unobtrusive vertical elements. This design does not relate to that character. Further afield, most other houses in the vicinity are similarly constructed. 2. The design meets the development and design standards established in this Development Code; and Staff Response: The design has concerning elements that may deviate from the development and design standards contained in the Development Code. 3. The design reflects the long-range goals and design criteria from the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other applicable, adopted plan documents. Staff Response: Applicable adopted plans include the Avon Comprehensive Plan and provisions of the Development Code. The design has been evaluated for conformance with these plans and staff has determined that there are concerns with the proposal. Staff Recommendation for MNR18014 Minor Design & Development Plan: Staff recommends denying the Minor Development Plan application for Lot 111C Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision with the following findings: Findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review; 2. The proposal does not meet the purpose of the Development Code as specified in §7.04.030(l); 3. The design does not reflect the long-range goals of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 4. The design does not meet the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code, specifically related to sections 7.28.090(d)(3)(iii), 7.28.090(d)(5), 7.28.030(12)(ii), and 7.28.090(e)(3)(i)(B); and 5. The design does not relate the development to the character of the surrounding community which is composed of steep gabled roof forms with shake shingles, and otherwise open uncovered deck designs; Recommended Motion: “I move to deny Case #MNR18014, an application for Minor Design and Development Plan for Lot 111C Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision together with the findings recommended by staff.” Attachments A. Application Materials B. Public Comments Attachment A, 1 Attachment A, 2 Attachment A, 3 Attachment A, 4 Attachment A, 5 Attachment A, 6  X-Series Residential Solar Panels                       Datasheet   More than 21% Efficiency Ideal for roofs where space is at a premium or where future expansion might be needed.   Maximum Performance Designed to deliver the most energy in demanding real-world conditions, in partial shade and hot rooftop temperatures.1,2,4   Premium Aesthetics SunPower® Signature™ Black X-Series panels blend harmoniously into your roof. The most elegant choice for your home.   Maxeon® Solar Cells: Fundamentally better Engineered for performance, designed for durability. Engineered for Peace of Mind Designed to deliver consistent, trouble-free energy over a very long lifetime. 3,4   Designed for Durability The SunPower Maxeon Solar Cell is the only cell built on a solid copper foundation. Virtually impervious to the corrosion and cracking that degrade conventional panels. 3   Same excellent durability as E-Series panels. #1 Rank in Fraunhofer durability test.9 100% power maintained in Atlas 25+ comprehensive durability test.10       Unmatched Performance, Reliability & Aesthetics Highest Efficiency5 Generate more energy per square foot X-Series residential panels convert more sunlight to electricity by producing 38% more power per panel1 and 70% more energy per square foot over 25 years.1,2,3 Highest Energy Production6 Produce more energy per rated watt High year-one performance delivers 8–10% more energy per rated watt.2 This advantage increases over time, producing 21% more energy over the first 25 years to meet your needs.3 0 5 10 15 20 25 SunPower X-Series Conventional 25-Year Energy Production / WattYears 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 110% 100% 120% 36% more, year 25 9% more, year 1 21% More Energy Per Rated Watt 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% Maintains High Power at High Temps No Light-Induced Degradation High Average Watts High-Performance Anti-Reflective Glass Better Low-Light and Spectral Response Year 1 Energy Advantage / Watt          SIGNATURETM BLACK SPR-X21-335-BLK     SPR-X21-345 SunPower® X-Series Residential Solar Panels | X21-335-BLK | X21-345 Attachment A, 7  X-Series Residential Solar Panels  Tests And Certifications Standard Tests13 UL1703 (Type 2 Fire Rating), IEC 61215, IEC 61730 Quality Certs ISO 9001:2008, ISO 14001:2004 EHS Compliance RoHS, OHSAS 18001:2007, lead free, REACH SVHC-163, PV Cycle Sustainability Cradle to Cradle CertifiedTM Silver (eligible for LEED points)14 Ammonia Test IEC 62716 Desert Test 10.1109/PVSC.2013.6744437 Salt Spray Test IEC 61701 (maximum severity) PID Test Potential-Induced Degradation free: 1000 V9 Available Listings UL, TUV, JET, MCS, CSA, FSEC, CEC Operating Condition And Mechanical Data Temperature –40° F to +185° F (–40° C to +85° C) Impact Resistance 1 inch (25 mm) diameter hail at 52 mph (23 m/s) Appearance Class A+ Solar Cells 96 Monocrystalline Maxeon Gen III Tempered Glass High-transmission tempered anti-reflective Junction Box IP-65, MC4 compatible Weight 41 lbs (18.6 kg) Max. Load G5 Frame: Wind: 62 psf, 3000 Pa front & back Snow: 125 psf, 6000 Pa front G3 Frame: Wind: 50 psf, 2400 Pa front & back Snow: 112 psf, 5400 Pa front Frame Class 1 black anodized (highest AAMA rating) G5 FRAME PROFILE G3 FRAME PROFILE 30 mm [1.2 in] [1.8 in]InvisiMountTM Compatible Not InvisiMount Compatible 1558 mm [61.3 in] 1046 mm [41.2 in] 46 mm [1.8 in] 46 mm32 mm [1.3 in] LONG SIDE 22 mm [0.9 in] SHORT SIDE [1.8 in] 46 mm G5 frames have no mounting holes. Please read the safety and installation guide.                                                                            Electrical Data SPR-X21-335-BLK SPR-X21-345 Nominal Power (Pnom)11 335 W 345 W Power Tolerance +5/–0% +5/–0% Avg. Panel Efficiency12 21.0% 21.5% Rated Voltage (Vmpp) 57.3 V 57.3 V Rated Current (Impp) 5.85 A 6.02 A Open-Circuit Voltage (Voc) 67.9 V 68.2 V Short-Circuit Current (Isc) 6.23 A 6.39 A Max. System Voltage 600 V UL & 1000 V IEC Maximum Series Fuse 15 A Power Temp Coef. –0.29% / o C Voltage Temp Coef. –167.4 mV / o C Current Temp Coef. 2.9 mA / o C REFERENCES: 1 All comparisons are SPR-X21-345 vs. a representative conventional panel: 250 W, approx. 1.6 m², 15.3% efficiency. 2 Typically 8–10% more energy per watt, BEW/DNV Engineering “SunPower Yield Report,” Jan 2013. 3 SunPower 0.25%/yr degradation vs. 1.0%/yr conv. panel. Campeau, Z. et al. “SunPower Module Degradation Rate,” SunPower white paper, Feb 2013; Jordan, Dirk “SunPower Test Report,” NREL, Q1-2015. 4 “SunPower Module 40-Year Useful Life” SunPower white paper, May 2015. Useful life is 99 out of 100 panels operating at more than 70% of rated power. 5 Highest of over 3,200 silicon solar panels, Photon Module Survey, Feb 2014. 6 1% more energy than E-Series panels, 8% more energy than the average of the top 10 panel companies tested in 2012 (151 panels, 102 companies), Photon International, Feb 2013. 7 Compared with the top 15 manufacturers. SunPower Warranty Review, May 2015. 8 Some restrictions and exclusions may apply. See warranty for details. 9 X-Series same as E-Series, 5 of top 8 panel manufacturers tested in 2013 report, 3 additional panels in 2014. Ferrara, C., et al. "Fraunhofer PV Durability Initiative for Solar Modules: Part 2". Photovoltaics International, 2014. 10 Compared with the non-stress-tested control panel. X-Series same as E-Series, tested in Atlas 25+ Durability test report, Feb 2013. 11 Standard Test Conditions (1000 W/m² irradiance, AM 1.5, 25° C). NREL calibration Standard: SOMS current, LACCS FF and Voltage. 12 Based on average of measured power values during production. 13 Type 2 fire rating per UL1703:2013, Class C fire rating per UL1703:2002. 14 See salesperson for details. SunPower Offers The Best Combined Power And Product Warranty Power Warranty Product Warranty 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 0 5 10 15 20 25 Years Traditional Warranty SunPower Conventional panel “linear” warranty 0 5 10 15 20 25 SunPower Traditional Warranty Years   More guaranteed power: 95% for first 5 years, −0.4%/yr. to year 25 7  Combined Power and Product defect 25­year coverage 8   Document # 504828 Rev F /LTR_US ©December 2016 SunPower Corporation. All rights reserved. SUNPOWER, the SUNPOWER logo, MAXEON, SIGNATURE and InvisiMount are trademarks or registered trademarks of SunPower Corporation. Specifications included in this datasheet are subject to change without notice. SunPower® X-Series Residential Solar Panels | X21-335-BLK | X21-345 See www.sunpower.com/facts for more reference information. For more details, see extended datasheet: www.sunpower.com/datasheets. SunPower® X-Series Residential Solar Panels | X21-335-BLK | X21-345 Attachment A, 8 Data sheet SWA 285 - 290 MONO BLACK POWERING AMERICAN HOMES FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS For over four decades SolarWorld Americas has been creating the highest quality solar cells and panels. Driven by uncompromising standards of quality and reliability, every solar panel we produce demonstrates our commitment to American innovation, manufacturing and sustainability. Our Watts+ guarantees our panels will produce at least the minimum advertised nameplate power PowAR-TECHTM Glass features the industry’s best anti-reflective coating, capturing more light and increasing your panels’ power Our patented INFINITEETM Corners and Frame Technology are press-fit for superior strength and aesthetics and enhanced drainage By capturing more light, OPTIGRIDTM Cell Layout increases lifetime performance while also greatly increasing durability Perma-SilTM J-Box sealing encloses critical electrical connections, protecting them against moisture intrusion With CoAST Salt Resistance, installations on islands or near coastal areas are certified against salt corrosion MADE IN USA OF US & IMPORTED PA RTS www.solarworld-usa.com Attachment A, 9 +-65.95 (1675)39.4 (1001) 0.35 (9)39.37 (1000)4x 37.8 (961) 7.12(180.85) 4.20(106.65) 11.32(287.50)43.30 (1100) 0.26 (6.6) 0.35 (9) 1.30 (33) SolarWorld Americas Inc. reserves the right to make specification changes without notice. This data sheet complies with the requirements of EN 50380.SW-01-7517US 20180126All units provided are imperial. SI units provided in parentheses. PERFORMANCE UNDER STANDARD TEST CONDITIONS (STC)* SWA 285 SWA 290 Maximum power Pmax 285 Wp 290 Wp Open circuit voltage Voc 39.2 V 39.5 V Maximum power point voltage Vmpp 32.0 V 32.2 V Short circuit current Isc 9.52 A 9.60 A Maximum power point current Impp 9.00 A 9.12 A Module efficiency ηm 17.0 %17.3 % Measuring tolerance (Pmax) traceable to TUV Rheinland: +/- 2%*STC: 1000W/m², 25°C, AM 1.5 PERFORMANCE AT 800 W/m², NOCT, AM 1.5 SWA 285 SWA 290 Maximum power Pmax 214.8 Wp 220.0 Wp Open circuit voltage Voc 36.2 V 36.6 V Maximum power point voltage Vmpp 29.5 V 29.9 V Short circuit current Isc 7.80 A 7.86 A Maximum power point current Impp 7.27 A 7.37 A Minor reduction in efficiency under partial load conditions at 25 °C: at 200 W/m², 97% (+/-3%) of the STC efficiency (1000 W/m²) is achieved. PARAMETERS FOR OPTIMAL SYSTEM INTEGRATION Power sorting -0 Wp / +5 Wp Maximum system voltage SC II / NEC 1000 V Maximum reverse current 25 A Number of bypass diodes 3 Operating temperature -40 to +85 °C Maximum design loads (Two rail system)*113 psf downward, 64 psf upward Maximum design loads (Three rail system)*178 psf downward, 64 psf upward *Please refer to the Sunmodule installation instructions for the details associated with these load cases. COMPONENT MATERIALS Cells per module 60 Cell type Monocrystalline PERC Cell dimensions 6 in x 6 in (156 mm x 156 mm) Front Tempered safety glass with ARC (EN 12150) Back Multi-layer polymer backsheet, black with white outer layer Frame Black anodized aluminum J-Box IP65 Connector PV wire (UL4703) with Amphenol UTX connectors Module fire performance (UL 1703) Type 1 DIMENSIONS / WEIGHT THERMAL CHARACTERISTICS Length 65.95 in (1675 mm)NOCT 46 °C Width 39.40 in (1001 mm)TC Isc 0.07 % /C Height 1.30 in (33 mm)TC Voc -0.29 % /C Weight 39.7 lb (18.0 kg)TC Pmpp -0.39 % /C ORDERING INFORMATION Order number Description 82000248 Sunmodule Plus SWA 285 mono black 82000260 Sunmodule Plus SWA 290 mono black CERTIFICATES AND WARRANTIES Certificates IEC 61730 IEC 61215 UL 1703 IEC 62716 IEC 60068-2-68 IEC 61701 Warranties*Product Warranty 20 years Linear Performance Guarantee 25 years *Supplemental warranty coverage available through SolarWorld Assurance™ Warranty Protection Program – www.solarworld.com/assurance SWA 285 - 290 MONO BLACK Attachment A, 10 Attachment B Hello Mr McWilliams. My name is Paul Nowak and I and my wife Laurie own one of the 5 member homes of the subject association. I am not sure if you received a copy of our recent HOA meeting minutes but wanted to clarify one point. In paragraph 8 it references there were 3 votes against the proposed Ruemmler/Douglas house addition. It further stated that my vote or opinion was not heard over the phone. I just wanted to clarify that our home is also against this project making it 4 against (making it 4 of the total 5 members of the HOA not wanting the building addition as proposed to move forward). I’d be happy to discuss my rationale if you’d like to discuss so free feel to call me if you’d like. Thank you, Paul Nowak 2003 BCP 720-688-8408 Sent from my iPhone Attachment B Sign Code Work Session 1 Staff Report –Sign Code Update Project type: Sign Code Update Report Date: June 5, 2018 Location: Prepared By: Throughout Town David McWilliams, Town Planner Introduction An update to the Avon Sign Code (Chapter 15.28) is long overdue. The Avon Sign Code was originally adopted in 1986 and has been left largely untouched. Updates are necessary in order to better respond to changing aesthetic ideals and changes to the interpretation of the law. Aside from making it more current, staff proposes moving the Sign Code from the Buildings and Construction chapter to the Development Code chapter for ease of reference. This work session seeks to clarify what the current Code does and does not include, and to determine a set of priorities that staff can address in the rewrite process. Questions for PZC General code: Should certain sign construction types be required or disallowed from town? Currently, Code encourages, “interior-lit, individual Plexiglas-faced letters; or three-dimensional individual letters with or without indirect lighting” with quality materials. Are other types more favored? Are there types that should be banned? Sign Programs: They are used around town to grant properties more area or other advantages than would be allowed with following the Sign Code. What guidance should be codified to make desired and undesired outcomes clearer? Should certain sign types be disallowed from a program? Sign Program Amendments: How should amendments be phased? Should there be staff level review of certain amendments? Should individual tenants be allowed to apply for an amendment? If yes, what kinds of support from the HOA or property owner should be required? Other considerations? Schedule Staff anticipates a series of work sessions to hone in on desired changes that work towards a viable strikethrough, followed by a public hearing, and then final action by Council with an Ordinance. The target completion date is November 9th. Sign Code Work Session 2 Sign Code Update Draft Schedule June 5, 2018 Work session: Staff will present the state of the sign code, detail changes in the law, and their experience with administration of the program. PZC will be asked their opinion on what direction sign code amendments should take. Eric Heil will present legal considerations of the sign code. July 17, 2018 Work Session: Staff will present a draft code to PZC for their review. Feedback given will be used to produce a final draft. August 21, 2018 Work Session: Staff will present a draft code to PZC for their review. Feedback given will be used to produce a final draft. September 4, 2018 Public Hearing: Staff will present the final draft and PZC will vote on its recommendation for adoption. September 25, 2018 Town Council First Reading October 9, 2018 Town Council Second Reading November 9, 2018 Sign Code Adopted Sign Code Work Session 3 A Sample of Recently Installed Signs, and Others Sign Code Work Session 4 Sign Code Work Session 5 PZC Record of Decision: #MJR18002 Page 1 of 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: May 15, 2018 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Major Development Plan & Alternative Equivalent Compliance PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 21B Block 3 Wildridge Subdivision FILE NUMBER: #MJR18002 APPLICANT: Jeff Manley This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.080(c): DECISION: Approval of the development plan with the following findings and conditions: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code; 2. The application is complete; 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 5. The demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity is mitigated by the application; and 6. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community. CONDITION: 1. Temporary irrigation systems must be removed upon sufficient vegetation establishment, which shall not exceed one (1) year for ground cover, two (2) years for shrubs or three (3) years for trees. THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED: BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________ PZC Chairperson PZC Record of Decision: #MJR18004 & AEC18005 Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: May 15, 2018 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Major Development Plan & Alternative Equivalent Compliance PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 32 Block 3 Wildridge Subdivision FILE NUMBER: #MJR18004 and #AEC18005 APPLICANT: Jeff Manley CASE #AEC18005 This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.120(b): DECISION: Denial of the application with the following findings: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review, and §7.16.120 Alternative Equivalent Compliance; 2. The AEC does not achieve the intent of the roof design standard to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The AEC does not achieve the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the roof design standards; and 4. The AEC does not result in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the roof design standards. CASE #MJR18004 This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.080(c): DECISION: Approval of the development plan with the following findings and conditions: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code; 2. The application is complete; 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 5. The demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity is mitigated by the application; PZC Record of Decision: # AEC18006 Page 1 of 1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: May 15, 2018 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Alternative Equivalent Compliance PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 100 Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision FILE NUMBER: AEC18006 APPLICANT: Norman Mejia CASE #AEC18005 This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.120(b): DECISION: Denial of the application with the following findings: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent Compliance, and §7.16.080(f), Development Plan. 2. The proposed alternative does not achieve the intent of the subject design or development standard to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The proposed alternative does not achieve the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 4. The proposed alternative does not result in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and 5. The proposed alternative imposes greater impacts on adjacent properties. THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED: BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________ PZC Chairperson PZC Record of Decision: #MJR18004 & AEC18005 Page 2 of 2 6. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; and 7. No AEC is required for the center 1.5:12 roof pitch because it is consistent with the architectural style of the building. CONDITION: 1. Temporary irrigation systems must be removed upon sufficient vegetation establishment, which shall not exceed one (1) year for ground cover, two (2) years for shrubs or three (3) years for trees. THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED: BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________ PZC Chairperson 1 May 15, 2018 PZC Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 15, 2018 Site Tour – 4:00pm 254 Riverfront Lane – Riverfront Townhome Project Meet at cul-de-sac at the west of the site. Regular Meeting – 5:00pm One Lake Street – Avon Municipal Building I. Call to Order – The meeting was called to order at 5:00pm. II. Roll Call - All commissioners were present except for Commissioner Barnes. III. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda- Swearing in of commissioners was delayed due to the absence of the Town Clerk. Appointments of a Chairperson and vice-chair were delayed due to Commissioner Barnes’ absence. Items VI and VII were switched in order. Item VIII c was postponed due to the late hour. IV. Conflicts of Interest – No conflicts of interest were disclosed. V. Major Development Plan and Alternative Equivalent Compliance A. 4561 Flat Point – CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING File: MJR18004 and AEC18005 Legal Description: Lot 32 Block 3 Wildridge Applicant: Jeff Manley Summary: Proposal to construct a new single-family house. This project required an Alternative Equivalent Compliance application for the roof pitch under 3:12 for metal roofing. Action: Commissioner Howell motioned to deny the AEC with the following findings: Findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review, and §7.16.120 Alternative Equivalent Compliance; 2. The AEC does not achieve the intent of the roof design standard to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The AEC does not achieve the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the roof design standards; and 4. The AEC does not result in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the roof design standards. Commissioner Nusbaum seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. Action: Commissioner Glaner motioned to approve the 3:12 roof pitch alternative for MJR18004 with the following findings and condition: Findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code; 2. The application is complete; 2 May 15, 2018 PZC Meeting Minutes 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 5. The demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity is mitigated by the application; 6. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; and 7. No AEC is required for the center 1.5:12 roof pitch because it is consistent with the architectural style of the building. Condition: 1. Temporary irrigation systems must be removed upon sufficient vegetation establishment, which shall not exceed one (1) year for ground cover, two (2) years for shrubs or three (3) years for trees. Commissioner Nusbaum seconded the motion and it carried 5-1. B. 4250 Wildridge Road West - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING File: MJR18002 Legal Description: Lot 21B Block 3 Wildridge Applicant: Jeff Manley Summary: Proposal to construct a new single-family house. The roof design was modified pursuant to previous PZC comments and the AEC was withdrawn. Action: Commissioner Golembiewski motioned to approve the application with the following findings and condition: Findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.080(f), Development Plan, §7.16.090(f), Design Review. The design meets the development and design standards established in the Avon Development Code; 2. The application is complete; 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow the PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 4. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 5. The demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity is mitigated by the application; and 6. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community. Condition: 1. Temporary irrigation systems must be removed upon sufficient vegetation establishment, which shall not exceed one (1) year for ground cover, two (2) years for shrubs or three (3) years for trees. Commissioner Glaner seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. VI. Alternative Equivalent Compliance – 2290 Old Trail Road Fence- PUBLIC HEARING File: AEC18006 Legal Description: Lot 100 Block 1 Wildridge 3 May 15, 2018 PZC Meeting Minutes Applicant: Norman Mejia Summary: The applicant had a fence constructed on his property that did not meet the design specification of the Minor Development Plan approved by town staff earlier this year. The deviations from the code required an Alternative Equivalent Compliance application for the fence material and design. Action: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to deny the application with the following findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent Compliance, and §7.16.080(f), Development Plan. 2. The proposed alternative does not achieve the intent of the subject design or development standard to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The proposed alternative does not achieve the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 4. The proposed alternative does not result in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and 5. The proposed alternative imposes greater impacts on adjacent properties. Commissioner Glaner seconded the motion and it carried 5-1. VII. Major Development Plan – 254 Riverfront Lane – PUBLIC HEARING File: MJR18005 Legal Description: Lot 4 Riverfront Subdivision Applicant: Jim Telling with East-West Partners Summary: Application to build one triplex and six (6) duplexes on the property to the west of the Westin hotel and condo property. Action: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to continue the application pending an AEC application for the building distances under 15’ and additional design considerations. Commissioner Golembiewski seconded the motion and it carried 6-0. VIII. Work Sessions A. CO World Resorts Summary: The architectural team sought guidance, prior to the development of design drawings for future development at 39380 Highway 6, with respect to developable area of the site. B. Planning and Zoning Procedures and Best Practices Summary: Eric Heil, Town Attorney for the Town of Avon, detailed the nuances of planning law, conflicts of interest, meeting order, motions, and records of decision. C. Sign Code Summary: This item was moved to another date. IX. Action on Meeting Minutes • May 1, 2018 PZC Minutes X. Staff Updates • Hahnewald Barn • June 12 Joint Work Session with Town Council 4 May 15, 2018 PZC Meeting Minutes XI. Adjourn Approved this 5th Day of June 2018 SIGNED: ___________________________________________ Chairperson