Loading...
PZC Packet 0604191 Agenda posted on Friday, May 31, 2019 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 4, 2019 100 Mikaela Way – Avon Municipal Building 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. Roll Call III. Conflicts of Interest IV. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda V. Conflicts of Interest VI. Temporary Use – PUBLIC HEARING File: TMP19001 Applicant: Jason Manasee with Xcel Energy Property: Block 3, Avon Landing / No address - located north of I-70 on Post Boulevard Owner: Traer Creek RP-LLC Summary: Temporary construction staging and helicopter operations for power line repair. VII. Variance – PUBLIC HEARING File: VAR19001 Applicant/Owner: Tom Ruemmler Property: Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge / 2011 Beaver Creek Point Summary: Application for building improvements that would encroach into areas outside the platted building envelope. VIII. Minor Development Plan – PUBLIC HEARING File: MNR19008 Applicant/Owner: Tom Ruemmler Property: Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge / 2011 Beaver Creek Point Summary: Application for a “garage like” addition to the house, including a deck, and roof constructed of solar panels. IX. Consent Agenda A – PZC Meeting Minutes – May 21, 2019 B – Record of Decision – Reynolds Fence / MNR19004 & AEC19003 X. Other Business A – Village at Avon Apartments Comments B - Housing in IC District XI. Adjourn PZC Record of Decision: #AEC19003 & MNR19004 Page 1 of 2 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION DATE OF DECISION: May 21, 2019 TYPE OF APPLICATION: Alternative Equivalent Compliance & Minor Development Plan PROPERTY LOCATION: Lot 51B, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision / 2646B Beartrap Road FILE NUMBER: AEC19003 & MNR19004 APPLICANT: Sean Reynolds CASE #AEC19003 This Record of Decision is made in accordance with the Avon Development Code (“Development Code”) §7.16.120(b): DECISION: Approval of the application with the following findings: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent Compliance; 2. The proposed alternative achieves the intent of the subject design or development standard to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The proposed alternative achieves the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 4. The proposed alternative results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and 5. The proposed alternative does not impose greater impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through compliance with the specific requirements of the Code. CASE #MNR19004 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 condition: FINDINGS: 1. The application is complete; 2. The application provides sufficient information to allow staff to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 3. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 4. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity by the application; 5. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; and 6. The modifications qualify as a Minor Development Plan pursuant to §7.16.080 of the Development Code. CONDITION: 1. All denuded landscape areas will be reseeded with native mix grass. PZC Record of Decision: #AEC19003 & MNR19004 Page 2 of 2 THESE FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECORD OF DECISION ARE HEREBY APPROVED: BY:______________________________________ DATE: ___________________ PZC Chairperson 1 PZC Meeting Minutes for Tuesday, May 21, 2019 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 21, 2019 100 Mikaela Way – Avon Municipal Building I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:04pm II. Swearing in of Jared Barnes, Lindsay Hardy, and Steve Nusbaum Avon Town Clerk, Brenda Torres, swore in the newly reappointed Planning and Zoning Commissioners. III. Roll Call All Commissioners were present. IV. Appointment of Chairperson and Vise-Chairperson Summary: Pursuant to the PZC Rules of Procedure, PZC shall select its chairperson and vice chairperson on a yearly basis immediately after the appointment of new members. Staff will also ask that PZC re-affirm Lindsay Hardy’s role as Village at Avon DRB representative. Action: Commissioner Nusbaum nominated Lindsay Hardy as Chairperson; seconded by Commissioner Barnes. All were in favor. Commissioner Nusbaum nominated Jared Barnes as Vice Chairperson; seconded by Commissioner Hardy. All were in favor. V. Additions & Amendments to the Agenda None. VI. Conflicts of Interest None. VII. Fence Alternative Design & Minor Development Plan – PUBLIC HEARING File: MNR19004 & AEC19003 Applicant/Owner: Sean Reynolds Property: Lot 51B, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision / 2646B Beartrap Road Summary: Proposed fence with mesh wiring. The application requires an AEC because fences in Wildridge are only allowed to be made of wood per code. Public Comments: None. Action on AEC19003: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to approve File AEC19003 with the following findings: 1. The proposed application was reviewed pursuant to §7.16.120, Alternative Equivalent Compliance; 2. The proposed alternative achieves the intent of the subject design or development standard to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 3. The proposed alternative achieves the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan to the same or better degree than the subject standard; 4. The proposed alternative results in benefits to the community that are equivalent to or better than compliance with the subject standard; and 2 PZC Meeting Minutes for Tuesday, May 21, 2019 5. The proposed alternative does not impose greater impacts on adjacent properties than would occur through compliance with the specific requirements of the Code. Commissioner Barnes seconded the motion; it passed 5-1 with Commissioner Golembiewski opposing. Action on MNR19004: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to approve File MNR19004 with the following findings and condition: Findings: 1. The application is complete; 2. The application provides sufficient information to allow staff to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 3. The application complies with the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 4. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity by the application; 5. The design relates the development to the character of the surrounding community; and 6. The modifications qualify as a Minor Development Plan pursuant to §7.16.080 of the Development Code. Condition: 1. All denuded landscape areas will be reseeded with native mix grass. Commissioner Barnes seconded the motion; it passed unanimously. VIII. Project Referral for Avon Apartments Applicant: Richard Graves Property: Planning Area F / Lot 1, Village (at Avon) Subdivision / 1000 E. Beaver Creek Blvd Owners: Traer Creek RP-LLC Summary: Pursuant to the Village (at Avon) PUD Guide, design projects are to be referred, for comment only, to the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission. Comments will be provided to the Village (at Avon) Design Review Board for consideration in their final review of the project. Public Comment: None. Action: No formal action. Matt Pielsticker explained that he would summarize comments in writing, provide to Village at Avon DRB as DRAFT document, and bring back to the Commission at their next meeting for review and finalization IX. Consent Agenda A – PZC Meeting Minutes – April 9, 2019 B – Record of Decision – Benchmark Road Parking C – Record of Decision – Lot 7 Riverfront & Tract H Benchmark at Beaver Creek Connector Path Action: Commissioner Nusbaum motioned to approve the Consent Agenda; seconded by Commissioner Howell. All were in favor and the motion passed unanimously. X. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at 7:49pm 3 PZC Meeting Minutes for Tuesday, May 21, 2019 Approved this 4th Day of June 2019 SIGNED: ___________________________________________ Chairperson Page I 1 June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Temporary Use Permit Application Staff Report – Temporary Use Permit Case #TMP19001 June 4, 2019 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Project type Temporary Use Permit Public Hearing Required Legal Description Filing 3, Village (at Avon) Subdivision, Avon Landing Zoning PUD Address No Address, William J. Post Boulevard Prepared By David McWilliams, Town Planner Staff Report Overview This staff report contains one Temporary Use Permit application for consideration by the PZC. Summary of Request Jason Manasee (the Applicant) requests materials storage for two phases of an Xcel Energy structure project located within and northeast of Avon, mostly on National Forest land. The first phase of the operation (anticipated between July 8 to 12, 2019) will store material for four (4) sites that are accessible to ground-based vehicles. The second phase (August 23 to September 13, 2019) requires helicopters to move and set materials for 15 sites. The helicopter corridor for transportation of materials will be roughly through the current Xcel right of way and avoids carrying loads within 500 feet of residential properties. Property Description Filding 3 is located to the north of Interstate 70 in an undeveloped area that is part of the Village at Avon. For this project it will be accessed from Post Boulevard through an unpaved private road, illustrated with an arrow, located to the west of the property. Public Notice Notice of the public hearing was published in the May 24, 2019 edition of the Vail Daily in accordance with Sec. 7.16.020(d) of the Avon Development Code. Mailed notice is required for this application type and was sent on May 24. Review Criteria Construction-related activities are classified as requiring a Temporary Use Permit when the construction is not related to a building permit on the subject lot. The following review criteria are the basis for a decision on an application for a temporary use permit. (1) The temporary use or structure shall not cause unreasonable negative impacts to properties, residents, business or public uses in the vicinity, which cannot be mitigated through the imposition of conditions on such temporary use or structure. Such negative impacts to consider include, but are not limited to: visual, noise, vibration, trash, hours of operation, traffic congestion, parking, safety, soil and vegetation disturbance, natural resource impacts and reasonable expectations of enjoyment of property based upon zone district designations and community planning documents; (2) Facilities and services (including sewage and waste disposal, water, gas, electricity, police and fire protection, roads and transportation, as applicable) will be available to serve the proposed temporary use or structure while maintaining adequate levels of service for existing development; Page I 2 June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Temporary Use Permit Application (3) The temporary use shall comply with all applicable general and specific regulations of this Section, other Town ordinances, and state and federal law unless otherwise expressly stated; (4) The applicant has demonstrated that he or she possesses the requisite skills and experience to ensure that the particular activity will be conducted in a safe and orderly manner; (5) The temporary use or structure is not of a nature that will become impractical to cease or remove over time; (6) Adequate plans or sureties are proposed to guarantee restoration of the property after the temporary use or structure ceases; (7) All temporary signs associated with the temporary use or structure shall be properly permitted pursuant to Chapter 15.28, Sign Code, and removed when the activity ends or permit expires, whichever occurs first; (8) The temporary use or structure shall not violate any applicable conditions of approval that apply to a principal use on the site; (9) The temporary use regulations of this Section do not exempt the applicant or operator from any other required permits, such as food service or building permits; (10) The temporary use or structure, including any associated parking and traffic circulation, shall not disturb sensitive or protected resources, including required buffers, one-hundred-year floodplains and required landscaping, and the applicant shall agree to restore all disturbed areas of the site to the condition that existed prior to the temporary use or structure; (11) Tents and other temporary structures shall be located so as not to interfere with the normal operations of any permanent use located on the property, shall be anchored and meet the requirements of the Building Official, including fire rating; (12) Off-street parking shall be adequate to accommodate the proposed temporary use or an acceptable parking plan shall be approved with the temporary use or structure; (13) The temporary use will not result in excessive demands for police, ambulance, fire or other essential public services which may negatively impact the capacity of existing public services to meet existing public service demands or the applicant agrees to mitigate the increased demands for public services; (14) The size, nature or location of the temporary use or structure is not reasonably likely to cause a clear and present danger of injury to persons and property; (15) Another temporary use permit application has not been received prior in time or has already been approved for the same time and place requested by the applicant or so close in time and place to that required by the applicant that the issuance of both permits would cause undue traffic congestion; (16) The location of the temporary use or structure will not substantially interfere with any construction or maintenance work scheduled to take place upon Town streets; and (17) The temporary use or structure shall be for a duration which is appropriate considering the location, use, planned development and activities in the vicinity and impact on nearby properties; however, in no event shall a temporary use be granted for more than three (3) years. Staff Response: The application has been evaluated for conformance with these criteria and staff determined that it meets the requirements. The proposed storage site is in an unpopulated area of town, near the freeway. These factors limit the amount of disturbance or unacceptable noise anticipated by the storage and helicopter operations proposed. There is no anticipated waste or needed waste disposal, as all discarded electric poles will be taken off site with 18-wheelers. Matting will be laid before vehicle entry, and any rutting will be mitigated on the private road and the property. Anticipated helicopter hours of operation are generally 8:00 am to 4:00 pm and may include weekends. Staff suggests including a slightly larger window of operations as a condition of approval. Helicopter fueling may Page I 3 June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Temporary Use Permit Application take place and if so, may require further oversight from the Town. Staff Recommendation for TMP19001 Minor Development Plan Staff recommends approval of the TMP application for Filing 3, Village (at Avon) Subdivision, with the following findings and conditions: Findings: 1. The application qualifies as a Temporary Use Permit subject to review according to §7.16.020 of the Development Code; 2. The application is complete; 3. The application provides sufficient information to allow 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. There is no extra demand for public services or infrastructure exceeding current capacity by the application. Conditions: 1. Helicopter operation is permitted daily between 8:00 am and 6:00 pm; 2. Helicopter fueling may require additional staff approval to ensure safety; and 3. The site shall be restored to original grade and vegetation. Recommended Motion “I Move to approve case #TMP19001, a Temporary Use Permit of storage and helicopter operations on Filing 3, Village (at Avon) Subdivision, together with the findings of fact and conditions as recommended by staff.” Attachment: A. Application Materials 1 FW: Xcel - Fly-yard Service on Traer Creek Property - Map Request for 8425 structure replacements Subject: Attachments:8425_FlyYard 300' buffer area properties.pdf A. Project 8415 is a ground‐accessed project, and it will be accessed with a route along Ground access  with trucks along and within the XCEL right of way area (see attached map) for the replacement of four  structures (several of these structures are classed as emergency replacement‐required by Xcel  engineers);   project 8415 will have the materials staged at the Traer Creek Fly‐yard property  The tentative project schedule for the replacement of these 4 structures (without the use of a helicopter) will be from  7/8/19 to 7/12/19.  B. Project 8425 is going to require helicopter‐set for the replacement of 15 structures, with a flight path  up and following along the Xcel right of way area (several of these structures are classed as emergency‐ replacement‐required by Xcel Engineers)  Project 8425 will have the materials staged at the Traer Creek Fly‐yard property  The tentative project schedule for the replacement of these 15 structures (with the use of a helicopter) will be from  8/23/19 to 9/13/19.  Xcel abides by FAA rules that forbid the helicopters from carrying any loads within 500 ft of residential properties.  Thank you,  Ryan McMakin ROW AGENT As Contract Agent for XCEL ENERGY (720)272-5756 Ryan.McMakin@hdrinc.com Attachment A "J "J !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!. !. !. !.!.!.!.!.!.!.!. !. !.!.!.!. !. !. !. !.!. !. !. !.!. !. !. !. !. !. !.!.!.!. !.!. !. !.!. !.!. !. !. !. POTATO PATCH LIO NS HEA D ALPINEALTA LOW ERTRAVERSEK IN N IKIN N ICK GREENHILLB UF F E HR CRE EK AROSASTONECREEK S H A S T A GENEVAINTERSTATE70 ACCESS REDSANDSTONEU S HWY 6 ASP EN G RO V E C O TT O N W O O D GOP HER SANDYST . M O R IT Z LUCERNEPL A C ID 781 SPURRIVERSIDE EAG LE M A T T E RHORN EAGLE DRIVE ZERMATT B A S IN G D A L E LUPINE TIM BERCREEKLIFTT A MAR A C K TAHO EMARI P O S A SIERRA BEAV ER D AM LARKSPUR U S HWY 24 MORAINEBE L L F L O W E R ASP E N RI DGE COYOTE MEAD O W R IDG E ELLIO TCO LU M BINE NOTTINGHAM RANCH VERMONTMEAD OW CHAMONIXWIL L IAMJ. POST DEER REDSANDSTONESPUR W E S TH AV E N KAYAK COUNTYRD P 14 CORTINAMAIN V A I L ELK GARMISCHDAISY SNOWB ERR Y LI N E S H A C K F RO N T A G E LIFT 8 TOWERSANDSTONEFOREST SWIFT GULCH LI ON S RI D GERED & WHITE MOUNTAINTO P LIFT 8REDSANDSTONE-MUDDY PASSBOTTOM LIFT 7 M A I N V AIL S P U R CDAVOS INT ER ST A T E 7 0 B U F F E H R 8425 - 114 8425 - 121 8425 - 123 8425 - 125 8425 - 127 8425 - 128 8425 - 131 8425 - 132 8425 - 137 8425 - 138 8425 - 140 8425 - 141 8425 - 142 8425 - 151 8425 - 152 8425 - 154 8425 - 156 8425 - 160 AVON SUBSTATION - AVON VAIL SUBSTATION - VAIL PATH: C:\ARCGIS_DATA\8425\8425_PRESENT.MXD - USER: IWOOD - DATE: 5/14/2019 XCEL - 8425 LINE MAINTENANCE FIGURE A FLY YARD PARCEL #: 2103-083-01-004 0 10.5 Miles O LEGEND !.To Be Replaced !.8425 - Structures "J Substations 8425 - Circuit Proposed Fly Yard Attachment A June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 1  Staff Report – Variance Application June 4, 2019 Planning & Zoning Commission PUBLIC HEARING Project file Case #VAR19001 Legal description Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge Address 2011 Beaver Creek Point Zoning PUD Prepared By Matt Pielsticker, Planning Director Introduction Before the Planning and Zoning Commission (“PZC”) is a variance application for building improvements that would encroach into areas outside the platted building envelope. In this staff report the words setback and building envelope are used interchangeably as they are in the Avon Development Code. The improvements are described as phased and include a “garage like” addition to the building, a deck, and roof constructed of solar panels. While staff wholeheartedly supports the goals of advancing clean air standards and other emerging technologies that result in reduced energy consumption, the findings required to grant a Variance prohibit the granting of a special privilege, which appears to be what the application represents in this case. The building improvements are part of an accompanying Minor Development Plan application File #MNR19008. If the variance request is acted upon favorably by the Planning and Zoning Commission (“PZC”), the Minor Development Plan can then be reviewed at the same time. If PZC fails to make the required findings to approve the Variance, the Minor Development Plan should either be denied or continued to a future meeting in order for the design to be modified to meet the building envelope constraints. Site Description The property, located at 2011 Beaver Creek Point, is part of the Beaver Creek Point PUD, a PUD amendment that took a previously platted property, Lot 111, Block 1, Wildridge (a seven (7) unit multi-family lot) and created a cluster style development with five (5) single-family home sites. The subject property measures 9,691 square feet and is permitted one house with 50% coverage, or 4,241 square feet. June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 2  Approximate location of addition in context with BC Point PUD The PUD and corresponding final plat were approved in 1999, and construction of all five (5) homes commenced shortly thereafter. The other homes in the Beaver Creek Point PUD typically contain 10’ side yard setbacks, which result in homes approximately 20’ apart. The Final Plat memorializes the Beaver Creek Point PUD Amendments setbacks for the construction of buildings and structures. The Final Plat created “building envelopes” prescribing these setbacks. The setbacks at the perimeter of the subdivision are consistent with the Wildridge PUD – 25’ setbacks from abutting roadways, effectively creating 25’ front setbacks despite the fact that the homes face inward to the private driveway. June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 3  As noted above, the side and rear are 10’, which creates 20’ separation between homes. The internal setbacks from the private driveway accessing the lots are unique to the Beaver Creek Point PUD, in that they were minimized to allow the homes to be tightly clustered next to the private driveway. The platted building envelope for 2011 Beaver Creek Point is highlighted in yellow: BC Point Final Plat Other examples of clustered PUD Amendments in Wildridge include Wildridge Acres and the Claven. These developments, similar to Beaver Creek Point, proposed 10’ side yard setbacks, reduced front (internal) setbacks, and maintained 25’ setbacks from abutting roads. For example, Wildridge Acres plat: June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 4  Wildridge Acres PUD and Subdivision According to the Municipal Code, Setback “means the required unoccupied open space between the nearest projection of a structure and the property line of the lot on which the structure is located.” As described in the narrative and accompanying design plans (“Attachment 1”), the request is for building improvements that would encroach 9” into the internal building envelope line, 5’2” into the south (side) building envelope line, and 4’7” into the building envelope on the street side of the project. Some of the proposed encroachments are overhangs, not building footprint. It should be noted that some communities allow overhangs to project beyond building envelopes. Review Procedures This application follows the general preview procedures set forth in Code Section 7.16.020, General Procedures and Requirements. Some application submittal requirements were waived (i.e. title insurance commitment) because they were received in 2018 as part of other similar requests. An accompanying Minor Development Plan application for these improvements is being review concurrently on the same meeting agenda pursuant to Code Sections 7.16.020(4) and 7.16.020(5), Concurrent Review. Review Authority PZC will review the Application and conduct a public hearing on June 4, 2019. After reviewing the June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 5  Application materials, staff’s analysis, and considering public input, the PZC is empowered to make a final determination with motion and vote. As is common practice, staff will ask PZC to make a determination and direct staff to return with written findings and record of decision for action at the following meeting. The decision of the PZC may be appealed to Town Council pursuant to Code Section 7.16.160, Appeal. Purpose of Variance Regulations In order to prevent or to lessen such practical difficulties and unnecessary physical hardships inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code as would result from strict or literal interpretation and enforcement, variances from certain regulations may be granted. A practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship may result from the size, shape or dimensions of a site or the location of existing structures thereon; from topographic or physical conditions on the site or in the immediate vicinity; or from other physical limitations, street locations or traffic conditions in the immediate vicinity. Cost or inconvenience to the applicant of strict or literal compliance with a regulation shall not be a reason for granting a variance. Review Criteria The PZC shall use the following review criteria as the basis for a decision on an application for a variance: (1) The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcements of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of the Development Code without grant of special privilege; Staff Response: According to the drawings, the applicant is proposing three exceptions to the setback. The following list describe the encroachment measurement, area of property, and type of improvements: - 9” on the internal private driveway for roof overhang - 5’2” on the south side next to private driveway entrance for building addition and roof overhang - 4’7” on the Beaver Creek Point (“front”) side The relief from building envelope standards is not necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity. While each property in the Beaver Creek Point PUD has uniquely shaped building envelopes, each property abutting a public roadway contains 25’ setbacks. Each property in the Beaver Creek PUD has comparable building envelope sizes: Lot 111A, .241 acres; Lot 111B, .196 acres; Lot 111C, .222 acres; Lot 111D, .219 acres; and Lot 111E, .250 acres. The average size of building envelopes for Beaver Creek PUD is .225, and the subject property measures .222, which is consistent with other properties in the vicinity. The proposed degree to which the building envelope would be enlarged, in effect, is not necessary to achieve compatibility in size with other building envelopes. The Development Code is intended to promote and achieve a broad list of goals and purposes. The following italicized list is taken directly from Code Section 7.04.030, with pertinent sections highlighted. Is it appropriate to build over setbacks to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals if it results in a project that is less consistent with neighboring properties in the vicinity? PZC must determine if building outside platted envelopes/setbacks is necessary to achieve compatibility in this instance, or whether it would be a grant of special privilege. June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 6  (a) Divide the Town into zones, restricting and requiring therein the location, erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration and use of buildings, structures and land for trade, industry, residence and other specified uses; regulate the intensity of the use of lot areas; regulate and determine the area of open spaces surrounding such buildings; establish building lines and locations of buildings designed for specified industrial, commercial, residential and other uses within such areas; establish standards to which buildings or structures shall conform; establish standards for use of areas adjoining such buildings or structures; (b) Implement the goals and policies of the Avon Comprehensive Plan and other applicable planning documents of the Town; (c) Comply with the purposes stated in state and federal regulations which authorize the regulations in this Development Code; (d) Avoid undue traffic congestion and degradation of the level of service provided by streets and roadways, promote effective and economical mass transportation and enhance effective, attractive and economical pedestrian opportunities; (e) Promote adequate light, air, landscaping and open space and avoid undue concentration or sprawl of population; (f) 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; (g) Prevent the inefficient use of land; avoid increased demands on public services and facilities which exceed capacity or degrade the level of service for existing residents; provide for phased development of government services and facilities which maximizes efficiency and optimizes costs to taxpayers and users; and promote sufficient, economical and high-quality provision of all public services and public facilities, including but not limited to water, sewage, schools, libraries, police, parks, recreation, open space and medical facilities; (h) Minimize the risk of damage and injury to people, structures and public infrastructure created by wild fire, avalanche, unstable slopes, rock fall, mudslides, flood danger and other natural hazards; (i) Achieve or exceed federal clean air standards; (j) Sustain water sources by maintaining the natural watershed, preventing accelerated erosion, reducing runoff and consequent sedimentation, eliminating pollutants introduced directly into streams and enhancing public access to recreational water sources; (k) Maintain the natural scenic beauty of the Eagle River Valley in order to preserve areas of historical and archaeological importance, provide for adequate open spaces, preserve scenic views, provide recreational opportunities, sustain the tourist-based economy and preserve property values; (l) Promote architectural design which is compatible, functional, practical and complimentary June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 7  checking to Avon's sub-alpine environment; (m) Achieve innovation and advancement in design of the built environment to improve efficiency, reduce energy consumption, reduce emission of pollutants, reduce consumption of non-renewable natural resources and attain sustainability; (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; (o) Promote quality real estate investments which conserve property values by disclosing risks, taxes and fees; by incorporating practical and comprehensible legal arrangements; and by promoting accuracy in investment expectations; and (p) Promote the health, safety and welfare of the Avon community. (2) The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities and public safety; and Staff Response: The request will not have any direct effect on transportation facilities, public facilities, utilities or public safety. There are minimal impacts on light and air. In essence, the variance proposes 4-5’ encroachment into areas that would otherwise be free and clear of a building or structure. (3) Such other factors and criteria related to the subject property, proposed development or variance request as the decision-making body deems applicable to the proposed variance. Staff Response: Would this variance preserve the spirit of the building setback/building envelope regulations? Given the unique shape of the properties, and varied location of the corresponding private driveway and easement, internal building envelopes fluctuate and there are not consistent distances between the driveway and the structures. Variation to the setbacks, particularly the 25’ setback on the road side, is not warranted for reasons that are not self-imposed. There is nothing unique about the subject property (i.e. extremely steep grades) that would result in advantages to keeping a home or other structure closer to this setback. Staff encourages PZC to contemplate the proposed development and unique considerations of adding solar panels to the existing structure, or a new structure, as outlined in the narrative. PZC should determine if there are are other criteria or overarching considerations that should apply to this unique request. It is the burden of the applicant to show that the variance should be granted. Other considerations that PZC may want to consider: o Are there circumstances or conditions on Lot 111C that are unusual that do not generally apply to other properties? o Cost of constructing comparable addition within existing approved building envelope. The Applicant provided a gable roof design that worked within the existing building envelope. That alternative did not appear to be as compatible with the neighboring design aesthetic, and therefore, the applicant decided to pursue this application and design. o Should solar access and the overarching clean air goals of the Town override the built form fundamentals created by setbacks and design review standards? June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 8  o Character of the immediate neighborhood and type of deck and roof construction. o Would a setback variance be granted for any other type of improvement in the setback? o Should aesthetics, cost, and functionality override a zoning standard? Findings Required According to Code Section 7.16.110(d), Findings Required, the PZC shall make the following written findings before granting a variance: 1. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district; 2. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 3. That the variance is warranted for one (1) or more of the following reasons: i. The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code; ii. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone; or iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone district. Staff Response: Granting the variance would constitute a right to build in an area that is prohibited from physical building construction. As mentioned above, the concern from staff is that the 25’ setback near the roadway, should be preserved to maintain a consistently spaced built form in the neighborhood. The hardship must be more than mere inconvenience or a preference for a more lenient standard and should not be self-imposed as it appears to be in this instance. Options for PZC Action: 1. Approve the Application. 2. Deny the Application. 3. Continue the Application. Optional Motions: 1. Approval - “I move to Approve Case #VAR19001, an application for relief of setback limitations on Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, with the findings of fact and conditions as listed in the staff report” 2. Deny - “I move to Deny Case #VAR19001, an application for relief of setback limitations on Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, with the findings of fact as recommended by staff.” 3. Continue - “I move to Continue Case #VAR19001, finding that the submittal materials are not adequate to evaluate the development against the review criteria and require additional studies and information pursuant to Code Section 7.16.020(f)(2).” Proposed Motion: “I move to Deny Case #VAR19001, an application for relief of building envelope limitations on Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, with the findings of fact as recommended by staff.” June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Meeting Setback/Building Envelope Variance – 2011 Beaver Creek Point 9  Optional Findings and Conditions for Approval: Findings: 1. The development application is complete; 2. The development application provides enough information for PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 3. The application was reviewed in accordance with the procedures and criteria outlined in Code Section 7.16.110; 4. The PZC held a public hearing on June 4, 2019, after providing necessary public notification in accordance with the Code; 5. The Review Criteria in Code Section 7.16.110(c) were reviewed and substantial compliance with the criteria was demonstrated by the application materials; 6. The granting of the variance would not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the setback limitations on other properties in the vicinity; 7. Granting the variance would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 8. The modifications to the setbacks/building envelope keep the property improvements in compliance with other improvements in the vicinity; and 9. The Application complies with the stated purposes of the Development Code, including innovation of building design and the reduction of greenhouse gases. Conditions 1. Maximum Building footprint, including garage, of 3,000 square feet will be confirmed by survey. 2. Maximum impervious surface requirement of 50% will be confirmed by survey. Optional Findings for Denial: Findings 1. The development application is complete; 2. The development application provides enough information for PZC to determine if the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 3. The application was reviewed in accordance with the procedures and criteria outlined in Code Section 7.16.110; 4. The PZC held a public hearing on June 4, 2019, after providing necessary public notification in accordance with the Code; 5. The Review Criteria in Code Section 7.16.110(c) were reviewed and substantial compliance with the criteria was not demonstrated by the application materials; 6. The granting of the variance would constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the setback limitations on other properties in the Beaver Creek Point PUD and surrounding community; 7. Granting the variance would be minimally detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 8. The enforcement of the setback/building envelope regulation would not result in practical difficulties inconsistent with the Development Code; and 9. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in vicinity. Attachments: A. Application B. Written Comments $500 Deposit VAR19001 M. PIELSTICKER ATTACHMENT 1 Narrative On August 21, 2018 an Avon Planning and Zoning Committee finding stated “the design of the storage addition and deck relates the development to the character of the surrounding community which is composed of steep gabled roof forms with shake shingles….” and approved phases 1 and 2 of our 3 phase solar project to be built entirely within our PUD building envelope approved in 1999. Phase 1 is a deck; phase 2 is a garage‐like storage area under the deck and phase 3 is a rake style roof with solar panels attached to the roofing structure. After appealing the PZC’s rejection of phase 3 to the Avon Town Council, it was ruled that we could reapply with a gable roof design supporting the solar panels. When the roof was redesigned entirely within the approved building envelope, it would only accommodate a lot smaller solar system that would not be cost effective. Therefore, our new application is for a variance to build about 6 feet further to the south and about 6 feet to further to the east. If the variance is granted, the gable roof structure will support about 25 solar panels that would provide most of the electrical energy requirements for the house and two electric vehicles. It also makes phases 1 and 2 more useable. This is the best design of many alternatives that were examined. The proposed variance will allow for a smaller gable roof structure than other alternatives examined and is the design that best harmonizes with the existing roof lines in the PUD. When completed it will look like original construction. From the street passers by will see only the narrow edge of the new roof. This profile is much less intrusive than roof mounted panels facing the street and scattered on the existing roof that has 9 dormers. Aspen and pine trees in the yard of our ATTACHMENT 1 neighbor to the southwest (2019 Beaver Creek Pt.) will obscure his view of the roof as well as that of people driving north on Beaver Creek Point. If this variance is approved, 2019 Beaver Creek Pt. will still be more than 50’ away from 2011 Beaver Creek Pt. Other homes in the PUD are about 20’ apart. As is typical in any residential development, each of the five single family homes in the PUD has views of neighbors’ roofs and decks. Our roof is not adding an alien or foreign element to the PUD. Upon completion with the variance, the structure would still be nearly within the normal Wildridge and PUD setbacks of 10’ for side and back yards. Our annual electrical consumption is approximately 13,500kWh. The proposed variance supports a 25 panel solar array that will offset our electrical usage for both our home and our two electric vehicles. This 9 kWh system using 360 KW panels might get us to our goal of net zero energy use and is the most productive however using 300 kWh panels may be more cost effective. It is not an option to mount a solar array in our back yard because it faces the Beaver Creek Point street. Avon does not permit ground mounted solar installations to face the street. It is also not a viable option to mount solar panels on our existing 19 year old flammable shake roof. It would be problematic to keep the roof water tight with the required penetrations and the nine dormers that break up the roof to the extent that a large, neat installation is impossible. All the dormers also make the roof subject to snow buildup that will not self‐shed snow during the winter that could easily render many panels ineffective a large part of the time. Snow will self‐shed off the proposed gable roof and on to our property. ATTACHMENT 1 Dormers, roof vents and the Fire Department’s requirement for 3’ of clearance around solar panels installed over occupied space combine to limit the number of panels that can actually be installed on the existing roof. Roger Day of Roger J. Day & Associates has concluded that only 12 panels are feasible on the existing roof. This is more than 50% less output than the proposed variance design. If an existng roof installation was required, it would add considerable cost to this project because it would only be feasible if the roof was first replaced before installing the panels. According to Sunlight Roofing Inc., we would have to spend between $26K and $58K to replace an existing roof that may last another 10 years if untouched. Sunlight Roofing also ‘does not advise that solar panels be installed over existing roofing, best service performance of solar systems are calculated when installed over new roof coverings.’ Active Energies Solar and Sunsense Solar representatives also advised us against installing the solar array on the existing roof. Furthermore, replacing the roof would further delay the project while our uncooperative HOA approved a new roofing material. That process would most likely go beyond the end of the year and the solar credits currently available would be lost. They are scheduled to expire at the end of 2019. Our variance design will result in a very straightforward, simple solar installation that both mimics the existing architecture and is innovative at the same time. It will allow us to reduce our carbon footprint and do our part to combat climate change. Pages of prior applications for solar installations in Avon and in the Wildridge neighborhood are included with this application as evidence and precedent that other solar installations have applied for and received approval for ATTACHMENT 1 variances in order to enable solar installations that address specific site conditions and circumstances. ATTACHMENT 1 Review Criteria. The PZC shall use the following review criteria as the basis for a decision on an application for a variance: (1) The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcements of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity or to attain the objectives of the Development Code without grant of special privilege; Minor relief from the regulation is required in order to fulfill the objectives of the solar project to generate sufficient power to meet the home’s electrical needs as well as power 2 electric vehicles. The big goal is for the home and owners to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and adopt a more sustainable lifestyle that can serve as an example and precedent for other Avon community members to follow. The degree of relief being sought consists of a minor encroachment into the setbacks of the lot that will have minimal impact to neighbors and public property. A new gable roof is proposed to accommodate solar panels to meet the owners’ electricity needs. In order to make the installation viable, the proposed roof encroaches into the setbacks by about 6ft to the east and 6ft to the south. The existing 19 year old flammable shake roof with ni ne dormers and numerous roof vents does not have enough non shaded roof space that does not collect wind drifted snow to install the number of solar voltaic collectors needed to offset the number of Kilowatts required for the home’s electrical needs and the charging of two electric vehicles. This, plus the Fire Department’s 3’ clearance requirement for solar panels located over occupied space, limits the number of potential roof panels to 12. This amount is less than half of the 25 that can be accommodated on the proposed gable roof enabled by the minor ATTACHMENT 1 encroachment proposed. Twelve panels only offset 40%** of the homeowners’ annual electrical usage and render the installation non viable. Every consultant, engineer and installer that has been involved in the project has recommended against installing solar voltaic panels on the existing roof due to the limitations. Besides the fact that not enough panels can be installed to make the project cost effective, the existing roof would be problematic to keep watertight. The electrical conduit running between the numerous, small arrays would not be attractive. The new roof will also protect occupants on the approved deck from the sun’s cancerous rays and other elements. Also very importantly, the gable roof design harmonizes with the existing architecture in the PUD and of the existing home. The proposed gable roof has been specifically designed so the project will achieve compatibility and uniformity with the existing architecture of the home and other homes in the neighborhood. It will look like original construction and less like an add-on than some other solar installations in Wildridge (pedestals on flat roofs, large visible ground mounted systems, etc.). The solar roof is just another roof…. composed of a non-typical material. The roof is non-reflective and not an obtrusive or foreign element in the PUD or neighborhood. The 25- panel array that the variance contemplates will supply most of the electrical requirements for the homeowners’ home and two electrical cars, if more productive but less cost effective 360 KW panels are used. If 300 KW panels are used it is more cost effective and will produce 80% of the KW used by the home and electric cars. **Energy use calculations do not take into consideration t he amount of shading or snow build-up both of which have negative impacts on the solar output of panels installed on the existing roof. ATTACHMENT 1 (2) The effect of the requested variance on light and air, distribution of population, transportation and traffic facilities, public facilities and utilities and public safety; The proposed minor variance to build outside the approved building envelope would have zero effect on any of the above listed items. The small variance of about 6’ to the east and 6’ to the south would still be nearly within normal Wildridge setbacks of 10 feet for side and back yards. If approved, the variance still provides more than 50 feet of space between the applicants’ house and the house to the southwest. Homes in the PUD are about 20 feet apart. Arguably, in the broader context of the neighborhood and the community, the project will reduce impacts to the environment given a reduced reliance on fossil fuels. These merits should be considered in the evaluation of the variance request since they are the basis for the proposed gable roof and the overarching purpose of the proposal. (3) Such other factors and criteria related to the subject property, proposed development or variance request as the decision-making body deems applicable to the proposed variance. From a functional, cost effective and aesthetic perspective, the small variance is the best option for the property. With the proposed gable roof, the solar array would be barely visible from the street. The narrow edge of the gable roof facing the street is less visually obtrusive than other solar installations found in Avon including street facing roof mounted panels, very visible ground mounted solar arrays or panels mounted on pedestals on flat roofs. The 25-panel array on the proposed gable roof would provide the necessary power output for the property owners’ needs and would be in one concentrated location vs multiple ATTACHMENT 1 existing roof locations with lots of exposed electrical conduit connecting numerous solar arrays and disrupting the continuity of the existing roof of the home. Snow will not shed from panels installed on the existing roof creating a major limitation and safety concern whereas snow will self-shed onto the property owners’ own land if the variance is granted. The proposal has been very carefully studied and devised to minimize impacts to other neighbors and adjacent lots while maximizing the opportunity to generate solar power for greater reliance on renewable energy at this home. It is the applicants’ hope that given the careful consideration and sensitive manner in which the revised proposal has been elaborated and the nature of the proposal to adopt solar panels and renewable energy, the Planning and Zoning Committee will carefully consider the minor setback encroachments that are the basis of the variance request. It will take numerous small steps like this proposed variance to accommodate a cost effective solar project to meet the new Climate Action goals proposed and passed in the last legislative session to achieve 90% reduction in carbon by 2050. ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ADDRESS LIST 2300 Beaver Creek Point Laurie Baker PO BOX 6274 AVON, CO 81620-6274 2300 Saddle Ridge Loop Mickey & Debra Brethower Family Trust 510 Cimarron Hills Trl W Georgetown, TX 78628-6944 2100 Saddle Ridge Loop 2200 Saddle Ridge Loop Nancy and Randy Williams 6557 Kirby Forest CV Memohis, TN 38119-6629 2185 Saddle Ridge Loop Matthew Asmus 8707 Crescent Gate Lane Houston, TX 77024-7029 2190A Saddle Ridge Loop Ziegler Real Estate INC C/O Chad Ziegler PO Box 6272 Vail, CO 81658-6272 2190B Saddle Ridge Loop Brittany Benish PO Box 3009 81620-3009 2170A Saddle Ridge Loop Michael & Karen Weiss 4860 Griffen Blvd Fort Myers, FL 33908-2016 2170B Saddle Ridge Loop Jacob Brege PO Box 1752 Avon, CO 81620-1752 ATTACHMENT 1 2170C Saddle Ridge Loop Michael Dalton Declaration of Trust 1205 Arrowhead Drive Bubuque, IA 52003-8595 2170D Saddle Ridge Loop Syeve Rosiek 4819 Meandering Way Colleyville, TX 76034-4521 2170E Saddle Ridge Loop Young Properties LLC C/O Mountain Stream Management PO Box 2636 Vail, CO 81658-2636 2177 Saddle Ridge Loop LLC PO Box 741 Avon, CO 81620-0741 2110A Long Spur Narry Bennett & Linda Billera 1409 Pine View Place Golden, CO 80401-9272 2110B Long Spur Thomas & Annette Noonan 15610 Logarto Lane Burnsville MN 55306-5135 2111A Long Spur David Slick PO Box 1706 Avon, CO 81620-1706 2013 Beaver Creek Point Hugh A. Joyce & Temple Joyce 16463 West Crescent Lane Montpelier, VA 23192 ATTACHMENT 1 2011 Beaver Creek Point Tom Ruemmler & Judy Douglas Box 2726 Avon, CO 81620 2003 Beaver Creek Point Paul Nowak Laurie Nowak 2606 S. Milwaukee Street Denver, CO 80210 2001 Beaver Creek Point David Scherpf & Mary Ann Scherpf P.O. Box 8789 Avon, CO. 81620 2019 Beaver Creek Point Lisa and Doug Currey PO Box 8219 Avon, CO 81620 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 FILE #VAR19001 – SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION •DR. SCRIPT FOR HOT TUB •2190B SADDLERIDGE LOOP 2015 GROUND SOLAR PANEL APPROVAL - portions of application •2190B SADDLERIDGE LOOP 2017 ROOF SOLAR PANEL APPROVAL - portions of application •2807 SHEPHERD RIDGE VARIANCE - portions of application •5588 COYOTE RIDGE 2010 GROUND MOUNTED SOLAR HOT WATER APPROVAL - portions of application ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 1 ATTACHMENT 2 Town P&Z officials I am Hugh Joyce the President of the 2001 Beaver Creek Point HOA and I would like to respectfully state to you the the proposal for consideration on June 4 has been denied by all other homeowners for the same reasons the last proposal was denied. We have given Malhide several options for his solar panels at this time that can be approved and will provide him with an outstanding solution. Thank you, Hugh Joyce. Hugh Joyce James River Air Conditioning Co. 804.305.9595 - cell Have a Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious day! ATTACHMENT 2 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT ON 5/31/19 FROM PREVIOUS LAND USE APPLICATION (#MNR18014) • COUNTY SURVEYOR – JULY 23, 2018 • HEATHER LEMON – AUGUST 20,2018 • RICH CLUBINE – UNDATED • CRISTIAN BASSO – AUGUST 20, 2018 • GAIL BAKER – JULY 30, 2018 • DAVID MCWILLIAMS – MARCH 12, 2018 • JAMES M. RITCHEY – MARCH 28, 2019 • EMILY HORSTMANN – JUNE 4, 2018 & JUNE 5, 2018 • EMILY HORSTMANN – JUNE 5, 2018 • ISAAC THOMPSON – JUNE 4, 2018 2011 Beaver Creek Point Solar Project Rich Clubine cmcwilliams@avon.org David, Please see the email below that we discussed this morning concerning the Ruemmler Solar project in Wildridge. To whom it may concern, I am the owner of a local company that designs and installs solar voltaic systems in the Vail Valley area. I currently live in a house that has a large solar system. I drive an electric/gas Chevy Volt that is powered by my solar system. I built my personal solar array to offset all of my electrical usage, including the electric vehicle. I have spoken with Mr. Ruemmler on numerous occasions, and have provided guidance as to how large a solar array he will need to offset his home. He is very knowledgeable on energy efficiency and solar energy. He currently drives an electric car that he would like to be powered by solar energy if the Planning and Zoning Commission approves his solar application. When designing solar arrays, many factors including fire codes, build ing codes, orientation, available roof space, existing roofing materials and the expected remaining life of the roof should be considered. Upon examining all these factors, I would advise against installing the solar array on his existing house as there is not enough suitable space, and penetrations required to install solar could likely compromise the waterproof integrity of the older wood shingles. It would be even more advantageous to increase the size of the system beyond the 21 panels he is suggesting , if there was the available space to do so. The solar array he envisions does not face the street and will not have a prominent presence from the street. Solar panels have a non-reflective coating, so they should not cause any visual nuisance to his neighbors. I believe that Mr. Ruemmler’s creative solar design at the southern end of his house would allow him to achieve his goals, and meets the required codes and standards applicable to solar installations. I’m hoping the planning commission will take into account the unique and creative solution that Mr. Ruemmler is proposing to enable him to “go green”. Hopefully, through an advisory and consultative process between Mr. Ruemmler, professionals like myself, and the Town, his project can be approved. I personally recommend allowing him to install solar, without being forced to use the less-than ideal roof on his home. Sincerely, Richard Clubine Owner, Active Energies Solar Richard Clubine Ruemmler Residence Cristian Basso David, I am an independent solar consultant for Sunsense Solar who has installed numerous solar photovoltaic systems in Eagle and Pitkin Counties. I examined Mr. Ruemmler’s home located at 2011 Beaver Creek Point in Avon, Colorado and discussed solar options with him. Due to the numerous dormers, roof vents, the older shake roof and numerous tall trees on the west side of the home there is not adequate non-shaded roof area to install a system on his roof. I would recommend against installing a solar system on his existing roof based on lack of space and the new fire code offsets that decrease the amount of space available for installation. The design of a 21 panel solar array at the southern end of his house is the best location given the circumstances. An alternative option would be available to the Rumbler's if the Town of Avon allows a variance to build beyond his allowable building envelope. Since the home located at 2019 Beaver Creek Point (the Currey residence) is some distance away and has a very wide private road in between the solar array and itself and is located more west of Mr. Ruemmler’s home, allowing a variance to build outside the current allowable building envelope is something the Planning and Zoning Commission should seriously consider. This could reduce the amount of the cantilever over the existing roof and potentially allow for more solar panels with greater electrical output. The proposed solar array does not face the street. When driving north on the Beaver Creek Point road, the solar array is hidden behind trees located at 2019 Beaver Creek Point. The same trees block the view of the solar array from the great room area and deck outside the great room area at 2019 Beaver Creek Point. While driving south on Beaver Creek Point road, the solar system is blocked from view by a different group of trees and by the existing house itself. Every home owner has the right to install a solar PV system as it relates to their relative site. No solar PV systems shall be denied based on subjective aesthetic opinions. It appears from staff’s report that the main objection is an opinion on the solar array’s appearance. Thank you for your consideration. Cristian Basso Solar Consultant Sunsense Solar From: Cristian Basso Sent: Monday, August 20, 2018 11:27 AM To: David McWilliams Subject: RE: 2011 Beaver Creek Point Development Application Hi David, Thanks for forwarding this email. I just wanted to clarify that 2011 Beaver Creek Point's proposed solar project is not a ground mount system. Our design team at Sunsense Solar, Inc., which includes an on staff structural engineer, will be able to address the Town of Avon's concerns. We look forward to working with you to provide our client and the Town with any necessary information regarding this project. Let me know if you have any questions regarding this project or installing solar PV in general. Cheers! Cristian Basso Solar Consultant Sunsense Solar 1629 Dolores Way, Suite E Carbondale, CO 81623 970.963.1420 (O) 970.376.2977 (C) www.SunsenseSolar.com From: David McWilliams <cmcwilliams@avon.org> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 3:31 PM To: Tom Ruemmler Cc: William Gray Subject: Solar Panel HOA Approval Good afternoon Tom, We ask for an approval letter from the HOA not on aesthetic grounds (which you rightly point out is not allowed) but to avoid timing / maintenance issues. For example, suppose a homeowner was unaware of the HOA wanting a new roof on shared property and built some panels without first asking. A simple email will do, along with the supporting site drawings, Planning documents, and a $75 development application fee. Again, town is not judging this on aesthetic grounds, we are merely checking that the regulations in place for solar panels are being met. Best, David McWilliams Town Planner Town of Avon 970.748.4023 www.avon.org 1 Matt Pielsticker Subject:FW: Solar Installation     From: Tom Ruemmler <    Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 12:17 PM  To: Matt Pielsticker <mpielsticker@avon.org>; pedroc@zehren.com  Subject: Fw: Solar Installation    Isaac Thompson email of support    Sent from Outlook  From: Isaac Thompson    Sent: Monday, June 4, 2018 7:52 PM  To: cmcwilliams@avon.org  Subject: Solar Installation      Good evening,    I am a project engineer for  Haselden currently overseeing $5M of construction at the Red Canyon High School.  My  family and I live in Vail.   We are proponents of climate control and the development of alternative sources of green  energy in hopes of preserving the wonderful environment we live in today for our children in the future.    Tom Ruemmler is trying to do his small part to combat global warming by installing a solar array at his home in Beaver  Creek Point that will help him achieve his goal of becoming carbon neutral.  He already owns two electric cars and a net  zero energy use home in California.  Tom was a pioneer in the solar business in California and continues to this day to  strive for the greatest level of efficiency in his personal energy use.  To that end, I believe that you should approve his  proposal for the solar array on his Avon home.  I have seen the plans.  The structure will be built to commercial  standards yet remain in step with the architecture of the surrounding homes.  The design is practical, functional, cost  effective and will be visually less offensive than many of the other solar installations in Wildridge.  Federal, state and  local governments strongly support the use of alternative energy solutions, and Avon itself has a goal of 100%  sustainability by the year 2030.  Tom's project will be his contribution to attaining those goals.    Thank you.  ‐‐   Isaac Thompson      Virus-free. www.avg.com   1 Matt Pielsticker Subject:FW: Ruemmler solar array     From: Tom Ruemmler    Sent: Friday, May 31, 2019 12:15 PM  To: Matt Pielsticker <mpielsticker@avon.org>; pedroc@zehren.com  Subject: Fw: Ruemmler solar array    Emily second email    Sent from Outlook    ________________________________________  From: Emily Horstmann    Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 7:53 AM  To: David McWilliams  Subject: Re: Ruemmler solar array    Great!    Regardless of public voting records on the cause of climate change I’m fairly certain both senators in colorado value the  environment and it’s preservation—not only for its natural beauty but also its invaluable link to the tourism industry...an  industry that is directly linked to the valleys revenue. I can’t imagine a scenario where efforts toward ensuring a healthy  mountain landscape and ski culture wouldn’t benefit everyone!    All the very best,    Emily    Sent from my iPhone    > On Jun 5, 2018, at 8:39 AM, David McWilliams <cmcwilliams@avon.org> wrote:  >  > Thanks for your public comment.  They will be delivered to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the start of the  meeting this evening.  >  >  > David McWilliams  > Town Planner  > Town of Avon  > 970.748.4023  > www.avon.org  >  >  > ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  2 > From: Emily Horstmann    > Sent: Monday, June 04, 2018 9:21 PM  > To: David McWilliams <cmcwilliams@avon.org>  > Subject: Ruemmler solar array  >  > Mr. McWilliams  >  > My husband and I recently relocated to the Vail valley. We have a two year old daughter and a five month old  daughter. We are currently renting a condo from Tom Ruemmler in Vail. My husband's job enabled our relocation;  however, the key factor for our move from the east coast to Colorado one year ago, and then from Denver to Vail a few  months ago, is our love for mountains and the lifestyle that a mountain town has to offer year round. Our concern is  that our children will not grow up how we envisioned due to climate change. We need to heighten our focus on  environmental perseveration now in order to secure for tomorrow any semblance of the mountain life that brought us  to Colorado.  >  > Tom is working to make the type of critical changes we would love to see everyone take to preserve Vail, not just  talking about it. He is attempting to minimize his carbon footprint through the installation of a solar array that will  virtually eliminate his electrical consumption, including the 'fueling' of his electric car. I believe this is an honorable  objective. Mr. Ruemmler has years of experience in the solar business and has used all of his experience and expertise to  design the solar array submitted for approval. Its design and finishes mimic the architecture of the Beaver Creek Point  PUD. The array will only be visible from the road if you are specifically looking for it. Ultimately, anything that we can do  to contain the decline of our environment takes absolute precedence. I hope you approve Mr. Ruemmler's project.  Every step taken in this direction helps secure a future environment for my children that will not be hostile or dangerous  to their health.  >  > Thank you.  >  > Emily Horstmann      Virus-free. www.avg.com   2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 1 Staff Report – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting – PUBLIC HEARING File #MNR19008 Introduction and Summary of Request This staff report contains one application for consideration by the PZC: Minor Development Plan with Design Review. Action on this development plan is dependent upon prior action of the companion Variance application #VAR19001. The Application proposes a phased building addition as follows: Phase 1 is described as a deck on the south side of the home, connected at the second level to an existing deck that wraps the street side of the building. The deck railing design and color will match the existing design established in the Beaver Creek Point PUD. Phase 2 is a “garage like storage area” located under and within the deck footprint area. The “garage like storage area” faces south, unlike a previous design iteration that was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, which faced west toward the common driveway. The door to the storage area measures 15’6” wide by approximately 7’ tall, slightly smaller than a typical 2 car garage. Phase 3 is depicted as a gable roof constructed over Phase 1 and Phase 2. The roof construction materials are unclear. On top of the roof structure is a series of 25 solar panels. Process and Notification This application is processed as a Minor Development Plan, referred to PZC with public notice and public hearing at the discretion of the Director. Notice of the public hearing was published in the May 24 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. Mailed notice was provided for the Variance application separately. Allowed Use and Density: The property is zoned PUD for a single-family residential dwelling unit not to exceed 4,500 gross square feet as defined by the Wildridge Covenants. The square footage is expected to approach the limit, and therefore prior to a building permit the gross square footage would need to be confirmed. Lot Coverage, Setback and Easements: The applicant’s home currently covers 43% of the property and is permitted to cover up to 50%. The proposal would increase the coverage, and the final coverage would need to be confirmed by survey. As proposed, the design would required encroachment into three building envelope sides as outlined in the Application drawings (Attachment 1) and on next page: Project type Minor Development Plan Legal Description Lot 111C Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Zoning Planned Unit Development (PUD) Address 2011 Beaver Creek Point Prepared By Matt Pielsticker, AICP, Planning Director 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 2 The building envelope encroachments are subject of the accompanying Variance application. PZC will be unable to act favorably on this application unless the Variance is first approved. Building Height: The maximum building height permitted for this property is thirty feet (30'). Sheet A4.2 indicates a project height of 25’-6” at the new ridgeline; sheet A4.0 shows a project height of 27’- 3”. A survey may 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 wood siding and stucco, both finished and painted to match the current house. The railing design is proposed to be the same as existing. There would be a stone base on all sides of the Phase 2 storage View of the area proposed to hold a storage area, and covered deck. 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 3 addition to match existing home construction. Roof Material and Pitch: As mentioned, the roof structure material is unclear from the submittal. The roof mounted solar panels would cover the roof structure and be the primary visible element of the roof. The secondary portion of the gable form that dies into home is also unclear, but expected to be wood shakes to match the adjacent roofing material surfaces. The pitch of the roof is compliant with design standards, at 7:12. The “ceiling” height at the southern edge of the balcony appears to be roughly 5’- 9” or 6’-3” depending on which plan sheet is being reviewed, 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. This design element is not consistent with other roof overhang openings in the Beaver Creek Point PUD. 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.” The new ridgeline of Phase 3 would extend approximately 3’ higher than the existing small gabled dormers that it would connect to. While the addition is not ‘massive’, the visual prominence and view of the understory of the new roof should be reviewed carefully. Most large gabled roof forms in the Beaver Creek Point PUD are for primary roof forms, and not secondary roof forms. Exterior Lighting: No exterior lighting is included on the plans. 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: If Phase 3 (roof with solar) was constructed the Application would fully comply with Code Section 7.04.030(i), by helping to achieve clean air standards. There is no guarantee this would be achieved unless all phases were completed. In terms of design review, Code Sections 7.04.030(l) & (m), are most relevant: (l) Promote architectural design which is compatible, functional, practical and complimentary checking to Avon's sub-alpine environment; (m) Achieve innovation and advancement in design of the built environment to improve efficiency, reduce energy consumption, reduce emission of pollutants, reduce consumption of non-renewable natural resources and attain sustainability; The design appears to be complimentary to Avon’s sub-alpine environment. Roof shedding onto the driveway is a concern, and the distance between the eave and the driveway must be confirmed to ensure full functionality. 2. Evidence of substantial compliance with §7.16.090, Design Review; Staff Response: See below. 3. Consistency with the Avon Comprehensive Plan; 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 4 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.” 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: Additional information would be required at building permit to confirm full compliance with the previously approved Beaver Creek Point requirements for site coverage, impervious surfaces, and square footage. If PZC acts favorably on this application these items can be conditioned. A previous landscaping approval required replacement of removed vegetation with a mix of shrubs. If this application is approved, staff has offered the same condition from that land use approval application to ensure landscaping is addressed. 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 report addresses all pertinent Development Code standards. Most of the development and design standards are contained within the Beaver Creek Point PUD. 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. §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 as a whole; Staff Response: The Wildridge community is an eclectic mix of many individual styles and influences throughout its history. The construction in the surrounding community generally includes some variation of stucco siding and wood siding, with stone accents. More recently there has been a transition to more mountain modern style. The “surrounding community” can further defined as the Beaver Creek Point PUD since it is an enclave development with a specific design theme and character. While other homes in the Beaver Creek Point PUD have garages with decks above, similar to Phase I and Phase 2 construction as proposed, the roof element is a departure from other design features. The Beaver Creek Point PUD “Design Theme” is included on the next page for reference: 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 5 Design Guidelines/Theme for the Beaver Creek Point PUD Staff finds conformance with stucco, stone, guardrails at balconies, and gabled form. It is difficult to determine whether the roofing material/color, underneath the solar array, is consistent with the design theme of the PUD. Additionally, the design plans are hard to decipher whether there would be “large cedar fascia as specified above. 2. The design meets the development and design standards established in this Development Code; and Staff Response: As mentioned, most of the development and design standards are contained within the governing Beaver Creek Point PUD. 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. Options for PZC Action: 1. Approve the Application. 2. Deny the Application. 3. Continue the Application. Optional Motions: 1. Approval - “I move to Approve Case #MNR19008, an application for Minor Development Plan on Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, with the findings of fact and conditions as listed in the staff report;” 2. Deny - “I move to Deny Case #MNR19008, an application for Minor Development Plan on Lot 111C, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, with the findings of fact as recommended by staff;” 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 6 3. Continue - “I move to Continue Case #MNR19008, finding that the submittal materials are not adequate to evaluate the development against the review criteria and require additional studies and information pursuant to Code Section 7.16.020(f)(2);” OR 4. Continue – “I move to Continue Case #MNR19008, due to the [denial or continuance] of corresponding File#VAR19001.” Recommended Motion: “I move to Continue Case #MNR19008, an application for Minor Design and Development Plan for Lot 111C Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision pending additional information and/or a revised design submittal that does not encroach upon the building envelope restrictions in place.” Optional Findings and Conditions for Approval: Findings: 1. The development application is complete; 2. The development application provides enough information for PZC to determine that the application complies with the relevant review criteria; 3. The application was reviewed in accordance with the procedures and criteria outlined in Code Section 7.16.080, Development Plan, and Code Section 7.16.090, Design Review; 4. The PZC held a public hearing on June 4, 2019, after providing necessary public notification in accordance with the Code; 5. The Review Criteria in Code Section 7.16.080(f) were reviewed and substantial compliance with the criteria was demonstrated by the application materials; 6. The application was found to be consistent with the Design Theme established in the Beaver Creek Point PUD; 7. The Plans, completed in one phase not three, were found to be consistent with the Avon Comprehensive Plan; and 8. The Application complies with the stated purposes of the Development Code, including innovation of building design and the reduction of greenhouse gases. Conditions to be addressed during the appropriate stages of the Building Permit process: 1. Development must be constructed with all three phases concurrently to demonstrate full compliance with the purpose statements of the Development Code, and long range greenhouse gas goals outlined in the Avon Comprehensive Plan. 2. Maximum Building footprint, including garage, of 3,000 square feet will be confirmed by survey. 3. Maximum impervious surface requirement of 50% will be confirmed by survey. 4. Square footage of existing home and proposed addition will be confirmed to meet 4,500 gross square foot maximum, prior to issuance of building permit. 5. A planting plan showing three (3) 15‐gallon shrubs between the corner of the addition and the street near the driveway shall be approved by staff before a building permit will be issued. Optional Findings for Denial: Findings 1. The development application is complete; 2. The development application provides enough information for PZC to determine that the 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 7 application does not comply with the relevant review criteria; 3. The application was reviewed in accordance with the procedures and criteria outlined in Code Section 7.16.080, Development Plan, and Code Section 7.16.090, Design Review; 4. The PZC held a public hearing on June 4, 2019, after providing necessary public notification in accordance with the Code; 5. The Review Criteria in Code Section 7.16.080(f) were reviewed and substantial compliance with the criteria was not demonstrated by the application materials; and 6. The application was found to be inconsistent with the surrounding community and Design Theme established in the Beaver Creek Point PUD. Attachments 1. Photographs of other homes in Beaver Creek Point PUD 2. Application Materials 3. Public Comments 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 8 ATTACHMENT 1  Neighboring property’s garage with deck above 2011 Beaver Creek Point – Minor Development Plan June 4, 2019 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting 9 Neighboring properties showing garages with decks above sd sdfs Context with the neighborhood. Addition would be in center of photograph connect to home on right ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2 X $75 Check MNR19008 M. Pielsticker ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 2 ATTACHMENT 3 Town P&Z officials I am Hugh Joyce the President of the 2001 Beaver Creek Point HOA and I would like to respectfully state to you the the proposal for consideration on June 4 has been denied by all other homeowners for the same reasons the last proposal was denied. We have given Malhide several options for his solar panels at this time that can be approved and will provide him with an outstanding solution. Thank you, Hugh Joyce. Hugh Joyce James River Air Conditioning Co. 804.305.9595 - cell Have a Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious day! ATTACHMENT 3 June 4, 2019 Traer Creek, LLC Attn: Marcus Lindholm, Village (at Avon) Design Review Board 101 Fawcett Road, Suite 210 Avon, CO 81620 RE: Avon Apartments Submittal, dated April 30, 2019 Avon Planning and Zoning Commission Referral This purpose of this letter is to document a summary of the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission’s comments on the above-mentioned development proposal. Pursuant to Section 4(e) of the Second Amended and Restated Village (at Avon) PUD Guide, the Village (at Avon) Design Review Board shall refer to the Planning and Zoning Commission “for comment only and not for approval, ratification or disapproval, all development proposals submitted to the Design Review Board for portions of the Property located south of Interstate 70.” On May 21, 2019, the Avon Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Avon Apartments development proposal with the architect team. The following is an overview of the discussion points from that meeting. Site Planning - Overall site planning and vehicle entrance locations appear acceptable. - Increased parking supply will be positive to the development; however, this results in immense parking areas that could detract from the pedestrian experience and result in a negative visual impact of parking vehicles. - Icing on the north sides of the buildings in vehicular areas will be an issue. - Consider a future bus stop toward the west end of the project and pedestrian connections. Landscaping - Additional landscaping treatments (i.e. raised planting beds) on the west portions of Building 1 could help ground the building and provide massing more characteristic of a 4 story building. - Breaking up parking with additional landscaping would help the appearance of large parking areas. Building Design - Concern with the overarching design theme and compatibility with mountain architecture that surrounds. - Varying brick color throughout the project is beneficial. - Add vertical relief to horizontal elements (i.e. pedestrian entrances) would highlight/accentuate. - More variety with materiality (i.e. wood or wood substitute) could benefit the project and increase compatibility with surrounding development/architecture in Avon. - Roof color is bright and may be reflective; alternatives should be pursued. The above comments are not intended to be an exhaustive list of the discussion points on the development proposal. An audio recording of the meeting can be made available at request if so desired. Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. Respectfully, Lindsay Hardy, Chair Avon Planning and Zoning Commission Cc: Project File