Loading...
PZC Packet 081710Staff Report - Sketch Design August 17, 2010 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Report date August 12, 2010 Project type Sketch Design Review: New Commercial Construction Legal description Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Zoning Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Address 20 Nottingham Road Prepared By Matt Gennett, AICP, Planning Manager :/"- Summary of Request Dominic Mauriello of the Mauriello Planning Group (MPG), representing Jim Pavelich of GPI, LLC, the Applicant, has submitted a Sketch Design application for a new Commercial building on Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, also described as 20 Nottingham Road. The proposal (Attachments C & D) is to demolish the existing Pizza Hut building and replace it with a new structure which is to contain a restaurant and a retail space with a second -story back-of- house/storage area for the primary restaurant and retail uses. A written description of the project from the applicant's representative is included as Attachment C. Staff is requesting that the Planning and Zoning Commission provide feedback on the proposed design as it relates to the Town of Avon Commercial Design Guidelines, Title 17 Zoning (AMC), and the 2006 Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan. A full-size (24" x 36") plan set will be available during the Commission's review. Process The Design Review process is broken down into two stages: Sketch Design Review and Final Design Review. The purpose of Sketch Design Review is for the Commission and staff to provide sufficient feedback to enable them to return to the commission with a Final Design application addressing any concerns identified during the Sketch Design Review process. Property Description The subject property is comprised of 0.528 acres, is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and has an uninhabited building on its relatively flat surface which once housed a Pizza Hut franchise. The Vicinity Map (Attachment A) shows the subject property in the context of the surrounding uses and structures. The subject property is immediately to the west of the 7-11 gas station/office building located on Lot 68 with which it shares a driveway and an access easement that straddles the property line separating Lots 67 and 68. Lot 68 has a second access on the east side of the front property line as well. The property is surrounded by Swift Gulch Road to the north; Lot 4, Buck Creek Subdivision (vacant undevelopable TOA land) to the west; and Nottingham Road/Phillips 66 gas station to the south. Planning Analysis Use: The proposed uses, restaurant and retail, are permitted uses in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone district. Structure: The proposed two-story structure is 4,723 sq ft (the existing building is 3,300 sq ft). The restaurant space will contain 2,805 sq ft, 1,275 sq ft of which is to be seating area with the remaining 1,530 sq ft as kitchen space. The retail space is proposed at 845 sq ft and the back-of- house/storage area is 1,073 sq ft. Height: The proposed building height is 32 ft, and the maximum height allowed per zoning is 35 feet. Parking: 28 parking spaces will be provided including two handicapped spaces. The parking requirement for this development is 26 spaces. Setbacks: The required front setback is 25' the side setback requirement is 7.5' and the rear setback is 10'. The new building is located within the required setbacks. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed sketch design adheres to the district -specific intent and planning principles stated in the 2006 Town of Avon Comprehensive Plan and excerpted below. District 13: Nottinaham Road Commercial District This area's proximity to the 1-70/Avon Road Interchange establishes its importance to the Town's identity. Development and redevelopment that occurs here should reflect the standards in the Town Center, but should not compete with the Town Center in terms of size of buildings or intensify of development. Planning Principles: - Limit access points on Nottingham Road to simplify traffic movements. Staff Response: The access is not proposed to change from the existing condition and will remain singular. - Require landscape setbacks and internal landscaping of parking lots. Staff Response: The proposed, conceptual landscape plan does not include any internal landscaping of the parking lot; however, the parking lot contains less than 30 spaces and is surrounded by a landscape buffer on two sides. - Screen all equipment and storage areas from view. Staff Response: The trash enclosure is depicted as being set into and screened by landscaping on three sides, and all mechanical equipment depicted at f=inal Design must be adequately screened pursuant to this criterion. - Limit building heights to that which is compatible with the existing surrounding development. Staff Response: The proposed height of 32 feet is consistent with the surrounding buildings, which are generally the same height or taller. - Development intensity and activity should diminish when traveling north on Buck Creek Road. Staff Response: The subject property is located toward the southeast corner of District 13 and not on Buck Creek Road. Engineering Analysis The comments of the Engineering Department are attached hereto as Attachment B. Design Review Considerations The proposed architecture, materials and colors are depicted on Sheet 3 of the reduced Sketch Design plan set (Attachment D). The design intent is to have the structure complement some of the architectural character and elements expressed by the new science school and other buildings N in the Buck Creek PUD because they all exhibit a consistent architectural theme and will be the most visually dominant buildings in the immediate vicinity. The following minimum requirements from the Commercial and Industrial Building Design Guidelines shall be considered with this Sketch Design review and at Final Design: 1. The building shall be designed as a composition of architectural elements rather than larger single blocks that appear unrelated in form and context. Staff Response: The proposed conceptual renderings on Sheet 3 of Attachment D depict a composition of architectural elements and do not portray large singular blocks void of form and context. 2. The street level architecture shall enhance pedestrian activity and encourage a lively center of retail activity in the commercial core area, where appropriate. Staff Response: The new structure will improve the pedestrian experience on the south elevation with entrances located on Nottingham Road and an on grade dining porch. 3. Building facades shall be articulated with variations in material and punctuated with intermediate roof forms and building projections. Staff Response: The new structure is articulated with roof forms, projections, and variations of materials. 4. Varying expressions of decks, windows and surface treatment shall be combined to create a rich texture that will enhance the interest of the facades. Staff Response: The conceptual elevations of the proposed structure depict adherence to this criterion with porches and decks enriching the texture of the building facades. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the Commission review the proposed building design and site layout, and provide the applicant with direction for preparing a Final Design application. Exhibits A: Vicinity Map B: Engineering Comments C: Letter from MPG D: Reduced Plan Sets %411 ® — Residential Streets Feet Property Boundaries 4 5o too W=I rn�s mao.vas woes�obv m�comm�n�ry oe.a'no�r'.am oeoanmem laazorm—p 5nn,ip l,�rorgene,ar moposes only �m+a orn,o�n�esm[wa,ra�,r<ne acunac> ortn_ aata conl;.�nca nere�n CteaMd by Gommanily 1]e�e[nFmen! �eFar•meni -Lot 67, Block 1, BMBC Attachment A Vicinity Map %411 ® — Residential Streets Feet Property Boundaries 4 5o too W=I rn�s mao.vas woes�obv m�comm�n�ry oe.a'no�r'.am oeoanmem laazorm—p 5nn,ip l,�rorgene,ar moposes only �m+a orn,o�n�esm[wa,ra�,r<ne acunac> ortn_ aata conl;.�nca nere�n CteaMd by Gommanily 1]e�e[nFmen! �eFar•meni Matt Pielsticker From: Shane Pegram Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2010 12:12 PM To: Matt Pielsticker; Matt Gennett Subject: Lot 67, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek (Pizza Hut Lot) Engineering has the following comments: 1. The Lot that is located west of the Pizza Hut Lot was dedicated to the Town of Avon during the Buck Creek PUD process and has been renamed Lot 4. Please change the site plan to read "Lot 4, Town of Avon". 2. The building's footer and roof overhang encroaches on the 20' utility easement. A letter from the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District approving the encroachment must be provided. 3. The sidewalk curb ramp on the southeast corner of the lot must run parallel to Nottingham Road and direct pedestrians to the existing sidewalk in front of the fuel station. 4. The existing sidewalk located on the curb island south of the fuel station should be shown on the site plan 5. The new code requires all commercial development to provide a storm water management plan. 6. Any reference to removing trees from Town of Avon property should be removed from the plans. Shane Pegram, P.E. Engineer II Town of Avon 970-748-4114 office 970-470-0610 cell 7/30/2010 Attachment B Attachment C Mauriaiio planning Group July 6, 2010 Matt Gennett, AICP Planning Manager Town of Avon P® Box Avon, Colorado 81620 Re: Sketch Design for "20 Nottingham Road" (formerly the Pizza Hut property) Dear Matt: Included with this letter is an application for Sketch Design for a new building and additional parking at 20 Nottingham Road. My client is under contract to purchase this property and has a limited window for due diligence. We have submitted this application in order to understand any potential issues affecting the redevelopment of the property before my client purchases the property. This application is very straightforward. The new owner wants to demolish the existing Pizza Hut building and rebuild with essentially the same building footprint. The plan is the maintain the existing parking lot on the north side of the building that was redeveloped when the gas station and associated building were developed in 2003. The proposed use of the property is a restaurant and retail space on the first floor and ancillary storage and office space related to the uses onsite on the second floor. The uses are permitted by right under the Neighborhood Commercial zoning designated on the property. We are not requesting any special uses or variances. The project is being developed within the limits of the zoning regulations. As you are probably aware, the subject property was considered as one development site with the neighboring property when the gas station was developed to the east as is evident from the overlapping easements, joint access, and consolidated parking arrangement. Therefore, site coverage and landscape area were reviewed considering the two properties together. The parking, however, was developed so that all of the required parking for the subject property was located on-site. Below is a summary of the proposal: New two-story building with a total square footage of 4,723 (Pizza Hut is 3,300 sq. ft.) 0 2,805 sq. ft. of restaurant area with a seating area of 1,275 sq. ft. a 845 sq. ft. of retail space (gross) 0 1,073 sq. ft. of storage and office space supporting the restaurant and retail uses (gross) i 28 parking spaces, 21 existing spaces and 7 new spaces • The parking required for the uses onsite is: a 22 spaces for restaurant (60 sq. ft. x 1,275 of seating area) 0 4 spaces for retail area (4/1000 x 845 of floor area) o Total parking required/provided = 26/28 Project meets all setbacks: 0 25' front setback required/25' provided a 7.5' side setback required/54' provided east, 7.5' provided west 0 10' rear setback required/76' provided ® Project meets building height requirement of 35' with max height at 32' The design of the new building is of a very high quality. With the recent approval of the Natur2l Science School and the character of the buildings proposed there, the applicant would like to pursue a design that more closely reflects the character of that project. The proposed design could be characterized as "contemporary rustic." The applicant is hoping for a building style and form that is memorable and iconic while compatible with the character of Avon. Please see the plans included with this submittal. We look forward to meeting with Design Review Board and moving forward with this exciting project. Based on our discussions we anticipate being on the July 20, 2010 agenda. Sincerely, s Dominic F. Mauriello, AICD Principal m Y �'y fy .+x. A , 6 h , J_ tj y s � �, _ �� .. �� - �' _ _— - �'� +r II. .._.., �. - - _ �yy'� k� I �� u' 1gy. �'e 1iy. � '. f 1 .- � }Y;°.C--. 4ti, } � L _ `orifi I �"5� � � � 5- 1 ik � ,,.0. �;�� s s . .�_ r � ++y�am ,� - a t ��i r Vii' [` � ',� S � � '�' � �.. a l� i ,'.. �`� 'iF t . �r5 . —y: I � a � _ I �E•. �±'' 'Irk_ —� 1 r F- � t 5 In i� ��IF �t1� � � �!. 'r o'� � - �. e, , -� i:� .. 3 '� r`°� II �' , , t.. yie. f.. a E iy .I � } �Z '� 4 s - .,� ,i�, ,: r - - ` - , %� ��_ +�} �f {e :..x . Memorandum To Planning and Zoning Commission Fr Sally Vecchio, Asst Town Mgr, Community Development Date August 12, 2010 RE Criteria for Allowing Re -subdivision of Wildridge Duplex Lots BACKGROUND At its August 10th meeting, the Town Council continued reviewing the proposed Avon Development Code, and directed staff to work with the PZC to propose appropriate review criteria for re -subdividing Wildridge duplex lots into smaller single-family lots. DISCUSSION The idea of re -subdividing Wildridge duplex lots has been brought up several times during the Development Code review as a way to discourage the large duplex structures that have been built in the last 10 years, and to promote more openness and open space between structures by allowing the two permitted dwelling units to be separated. Although a Wildridge duplex lot can be subdivided pursuant to the Town's current and proposed zoning code provisions, there has historically been resistance to such subdivisions as being inconsistent with the Wildridge covenants. The subject has been discussed by both the Council and PZC for a number of years, although appropriate review criteria have never been adopted. Council has therefore requested that the staff work with PZC to develop appropriate criteria to be included in the new Development Code. Review Process Under the provisions of the proposed Development Code, the process of subdividing and developing a duplex lot in Wildridge requires three steps: 1) PUD amendment, 2) Minor Subdivision approval and 3) Development/Design approval. The processes and applicable requirements are summarized below. 1. PUD AMENDMENT PROCESS The PUD Development Review Procedures (§7.16.060) allow amendments to Final PUDs to be reviewed pursuant to the provisions of §7.16.020(g) Minor Amendments. Minor Amendments may be approved administratively if the amendment complies with the requirements of the Development Code. If the Director determines that the minor amendment would materially changes the approved PUD, the Director may refer the application to Town Council. 2. MINOR SUBDIVSION PROCESS A minor subdivision is defined as, 4 lots or less, requires no public improvements, consolidates 2 or more lots, or moves any lot line by more than 2 feet (Subdivision Categories §7.16.070(b)). After conducting a public hearing, the Council may approve a minor subdivision. New subdivisions must comply with the Town's requirements for lot layout, grading, streets, storm drainage, utilities, and public improvements (Engineering Improvement Standards, Chapter 7.32). 3. DEVELOPMENT & DESIGN REVIEW PROCESSES New development must comply with the development review process (Development Plan §7.16.080) and the design review process (Design Review §7.15.060) to ensure compliance with the development and design standards of the Development Code. The processes run concurrently, and no noticing or hearings are required. The reviewing authority for new residential development in Wildridge is the Planning and Zoning Commission. Review Criteria At the next PZC meeting, staff will discuss the review criteria for PUD Amendments and Minor Subdivisions, and will suggest additional criteria to ensure that the objectives for permitting duplex subdivisions are addressed. SUMMARY Council has agreed to consider appropriate review criteria to be included in the proposed Development Code for re -subdividing duplex lots in the Wildridge subdivision. A staff presentation at the next PZC meeting will include design tests on several vacant duplex lots in Wildridge to illustrate the issues that may result from subdividing as well as the opportunities to promote smaller structures and more openness between structures.