TC Minutes 06-08-19990 0
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL
HELD JUNE 8, 1999
A regular meeting of the Town of Avon, Colorado was held in the Municipal Building,
400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado in the Council Chambers.
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Judy Yoder at 5:35 PM. A roll call was taken
with Councilors Jim Benson, Debbie Buckley, Rick Cuny, Mac McDevitt, Buz Reynolds,
and Mayor Protem Bob McIlveen present. Also present were Town Manager Bill Efting,
Town Attorney Burt Levin, Assistant Town Manager Larry Brooks, Town Clerk Kris
Nash, Town Engineer Norm Wood, Marketing Specialist Michelle Frongillo, Public
Works Superintendent Bob Reed, Recreation Director Meryl Jacobs, Transportation
Director Harry Taylor, Police Chief Jeff Layman, Executive Assistant Jacquie Halburnt,
Community Development Director Mike Matzko, Town Planner Karen Griffith, Town
Planner George Harrison, Community Service Officer Steve Hodges, Finance Director
Scott Wright as well as members of the press and public.
Appeal of Planning & Zoning Commission Decision on Lot 46/47, Block 1, Benchmark
at Beaver Creek Subdivision (Victor Mark Donaldson and Thomas P. Weber)
Mayor Yoder stated this is a public hearing.
Councilor Buckley stepped down from the Council.
Mr. Mark Donaldson stated he and his partner, Mr. Thomas Weber, are appealing the
denial by the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) of the Night Star residences at the
June 1, 1999 P&Z meeting.
Mr. Donaldson confirmed the documents that the Council had received in their Council
packets.
Mr. Donaldson presented a model of his project.
Mr. Donaldson requested to make part of his presentation and then step down so others
could comment, but would like to come back at the end and complete his presentation.
Mr. Donaldson stated this project began development in the late 70's. The building site
was to have been phase IV of the Chambertin Townhomes. They went bankrupt in the
development. This lot was purchased by another party and it was used as collateral with
United Bank of Houston. Mr. Donaldson and Mr. Weber purchased the property 12 years
ago from the RTC as they were regulating the United Bank of Houston after a bank shut
down.
Page 1 of 14
• 0
Mr. Donaldson stated the soils conditions make this project unique. The three buildings
directly to the west went through $1 million in construction repairs. When the buildings
were constructed there were some poorly installed below grade water lines. They settled
the buildings. Mr. Weber was the general contractor hired by the insurance company to
repair the buildings. There is a series of 30 drilled piers beneath the spread footings and
retaining walls of those buildings to stabilize the building. The reason for the settling is
because the soils are very hydro sensitive. Mr. Donaldson intentionally designed his
building to be a defensible building.
Mr. Donaldson stated that he is certified by the courts as an expert in mountaint roof
design, snow, ice and rain water discharge. Mr. Donaldson designed the building to
detain the snowfall on the roof and discharge it through roof drains, much like the
adjacent buildings to the west. Discharge of roof snow and ice around the perimeter of
buildings is the cause of 70-80% of building failures in mountain areas.
Mr. Donaldson stated that he analyzed the building architecture around him, studied the
materials of the neighboring properties, the roof pitches. Mr. Donaldson pointed out in
his model the warmth and character and level of detail he has designed in his building.
He pointed out that the buildings to the west have flat roofs. He has not seen a building
designed with this type of roof in the mountains since the 70's. The P&Z told him that if
he brought in a building like that he would have been denied because it is not today. Mr.
Donaldson stated he has tried to design a building for today. He is not pursuing the
mediocrity that exists in this neighborhood.
After receiving comments from the staff and P&Z in the conceptual review meeting, Mr.
Donaldson made modifications to the building. He presented very conceptual drawings
at the first meeting. The comments he received at that meeting were 1) One P&Z
member agreed on the extra parking spaces and carports, agreed with the good
maintenance materials, good massing. 2) One P&Z member had no problems with the
site plan either with the carport or not, okay with the use of materials, problem with the
architectural style it doesn't fit, problem with the length of the building, 70's and 80's
style buildings next to the project that must be dealt with. Mr. Donaldson stated he
disagrees with that comment. 3) One P&Z member agrees with the site plan comments,
agrees with the extra parking, will withhold his comments on the architectural style, he
has doubts, it may be too commercial looking. 4) One P&Z member stated it looks too
commercial, it should be closer to the Pet Center, it is not an alpine style, he has
concerns, it is well detailed though.
Mr. Donaldson highlighted some architectural design comments from the staff that was
the report delivered at the same meeting. In reference to the general architectural design,
the Commission should evaluate the project's architectural compatibility with the
surrounding neighborhood. Based on staff comments, Mr. Donaldson came back with a
project that he added color, textures, and broke up the building. Mr. Donaldson then
presented his model to the Council. He stated the building is mostly stucco because
wood deteriorates badly in this environment if it is not sheltered, protected and
Page 2 of 14
0 0
maintained every year. He stated the P&Z kept coming back to the issue of no wood so
he asked the P&Z where they would like to see the wood. He did not get an answer. Mr.
Donaldson stated that he has a proposal tonight to add wood if that would make a
difference in reversing the P&Z decision. Mr. Donaldson presented the design as
proposed to the P&Z. Mr. Donaldson stated one of the comments he was given by the
P&Z was the lack of articulation. He pointed out there was about 60 planes of walls. He
feels it is well articulated. Mr. Donaldson stated the project does not have a mansard
roof, it doesn't have alpine pitched roofs, but if he pitched the roofs then ice, water, and
snow around the perimeter will cause the building to settle. The staff clearly pointed out
to the P&Z that the soils are a problem.
Mr. Donaldson then discussed the landscape design.
Mr. Donaldson pointed out that the colors and other details on the building were drawn
from the neighborhood. He is not trying to stick out or glow on the hillside. Several
comments were made by the P&Z about having a substantial posture in the
neighborhood. He did not plat the property, the property does have posture in the
neighborhood.
In the staff reporting for the final design review the first set of considerations Mr.
Donaldson pointed out that he was given a clean bill of health on allowed uses, density,
lot coverage, setbacks, easements, building height, grading, parking, snow storage, and
landscaping. Then in the conformance with other applicable rules and regulations of the
Town of Avon, they discussed exclusively parking, which must mean that is their only
issue of all the other applicable rules and regulations. The staff has reviewed the
additional parking as very negative from the beginning. They commented that there must
be too many bedrooms. The property is zoned for 7 units per acre, which allows 6
units. The site has a capacity to have 50% more density than the three buildings to the
west (Chambertin). Mr. Donaldson stated his project consists of 2 two bedroom units, 2
three bedroom units, and 2 five bedroom units.
Mr. Donaldson stated that at the opening comments at the last P&Z meeting, staff
portrayed their report as responding to all the design review considerations. They did not
report on the type and quality of materials. They did not comment on the design of site
grading and drainage to minimize impacts to adjacent sites, rights-of-way encasement,
and easements. They did not comment on the compatibility of proposed improvements
with site topography to minimize site disturbance, orient with slope, step building with
slope and minimize benching or other significant alteration of existing topography.
Mr. Donaldson stated the foundation has been in place for about 20 years. It was stepped
and sited into the hillside identically to the three buildings to the west. He has very little
regarding. The driveway is at grade 18 inches from top to bottom of the run. He
proposes an 8 foot high retaining wall for a carport structure to provide 18 covered
parking spaces for a housing project. He has 10 more parking spaces in tandem. In
Page 3 of 14
• 0
reality, the carport spaces are not legal spaces because they do not have access onto a 24
foot driveway. He is providing 28 parking spaces for a 6 unit project.
The staff reported that the last project that was approved recently that had to have cuts
back into Town property was deed restricted. Mr. Donaldson stated he is not proposing a
deed restricted project. He does not see a need for any exactions for a straight zoning
project that is allowed by zoning that meets all the zoning criteria.
Mr. Donaldson discussed the entries to the units and pointed them out on his model. He
feels he has met the Town of Avon regulations. He believes he has been denied because
the project is too good.
Mr. Donaldson stated that his office assistant transcribed the meeting of June 1 and he
pointed out some of the comments. Mr. Donaldson stated that every P&Z member, in
their own ways, liked the building. It is a good design. They said it did not belong here.
Mr. Donaldson asked what fits, there is every kind of siding, roof, etc. There is a wide
array of buildings. He does agree it is an aggressive design, because it is good. It meets
the functional requirements, it is within the zoning, it has durable building materials,
colors and textures. Mr. Donaldson proposed now to change the structure of some of the
balconies and other areas to be entailed in wood. He would like to resist the wood but if
that is what the Council wishes to see so the project can go forward, he would offer to do
that right now.
Councilor McDevitt questioned where the water falls off the building. Mr. Donaldson
explained how the drainage system is designed and pointed out on the model where the
drains would be located. He also pointed out that he would have a heated driveway.
Councilor McDevitt asked if it was not possible to obtain the same drainage system with
a pitched roof. Mr. Donaldson stated it is not impossible, he could install gutters, but in
his professional opinion his proposed system is a much better system.
Councilor Benson questioned the square footage of the units. Mr. Donaldson stated the
two bedroom units are 1300 sq. ft., the three bedrooms units are 2400 sq. ft., and the five
bedroom units are 3200 sq. ft. for a total of approximately 15,000 sq. ft. of enclosed
living area.
Councilor Reynolds asked how close he is in massing height to the Chambertin project.
Mr. Donaldson feels he is proportionately equal to them. In terms of perception, they are
lower.
Councilor Reynolds asked how much of the existing foundation he will reuse. Mr.
Donaldson stated they are tearing out the slabs, repairing some of the wall corners but
basically leaving the rest in place and adding small amounts to support the structure of
the design proposed.
Page 4 of 14
Councilor Reynolds asked how much additional disturbance they will be doing to the site.
Mr. Donaldson stated he has minimized the cuts in the back, about an 8 foot cut.
Councilor Reynolds thought that Mr. Donaldson had approval of a project on this site
previously. 'Mi. Donaldson stated he did propose some designs. This was during the
time of fractionalization and that prevented him from being successful in the market; that
proposal did not go anywhere.
Mayor Yoder thought they had approval on a project about 1 %2 years ago. Mr.
Donaldson stated they had a proposalfor some three bedroom units. The market was not
in demand for three bedroom units so that proposal did not go through. They are
proposing this project be a rental project.
Mayor Protem McIlveen stated if it is a rental property that makes the difference in the
amount of parking proposed. Mr. Donaldson stated the Town requires 15 parking spaces
which he knows will not be enough. He has 8 more parking spaces than bedrooms.
Councilor Reynolds asked about snow storage. Mr. Donaldson stated he has a snow
melted driveway.
P&Z Chairman Chris Evans read the attached memo (Exhibit A). He requested the
comments be striked from his memo as are indicated on the'exhibit.
Mr. Evans stated the recommendation for denial on the project is not a soils issue. It is
not about the quality of stucco. Itis about, the appearance of the building from every
place you can see this site. It has a very dramatic impact upon the visual site lines of the
town.,, It is not about a "design for today". It is a matter of the design being able to fit in
with the alpine styling of the surrounding properties and the newer properties-being
proposed and approved in this area. Finally, there is a previously approved design for
this project called the Night Star Townhomes that was approved about 1 1/2 years ago.
That project had a mixture of pitched and flat roofs that was. architecturally compatible, it
had a mix of materials that blended well with the neighboring community. The P&Z
feels there is a better design for this site than what is being proposed. This building is
better in a transitional role. We ask that you support the decision of the P&Z and uphold
the decision.
Councilor Reynolds questioned the roof lines and the surrounding roof lines. He feels
this design finishes out the project. What did the P&Z see that was different. Mr.. Evans
stated if Chambertin came for approval for a fourth building exactly the same as the other
three, they would not be approved because that is not the vision of what Nottingham'
Road is developing in to. The P&Z looks at the architectural compatibility with
surrounding projects, but also what do we want that area to look like. We are not looking
for an industrialcommercial look. 'We are not looking to replicate Chambertin to the
west. The massing of the proposed building is essentially a flat roof plane with elements
stuck bn the front to break up the apparent one plane level of the roof. There are other
Page 5 of 14
• 0
design solutions for this site that the applicant has already submitted and been approved
that are a better solution for this site.
Mayor Protem McIlveen stated he is struggling along the same line as Councilor
Reynolds. Mr. Evans read the design criteria. He stated his concern is not from the
standpoint of compatibility with Chambertin. He feels the standard needs to be elevated.
The applicant alluded to the fact that the surrounding community is not of very good
quality, but now we are trying to say this is compatible with the surrounding community.
I don't think that is the direction we want to head in. We need to look at what this area
can become. The view from the public way was foremost, in my mind, in voting for the
denial of this project. This project has a commercial presentation. Mr. Evans did feel
there was too much stucco.
Councilor Cuny asked if there were any comments from surrounding neighbors. Mr.
Evans stated there has not be any comments.
Councilor McDevitt asked if there was any particular treatment of this design that would
take it from unacceptable to acceptable. Mr. Evans stated no because that puts the P&Z
exactly where the applicant stated he does not want them, he does not want the P&Z
designing the building. He feels the applicant has been given fair warning that the project
does not fit in this area.
Mr. Donaldson asked what is it about the Nottingham Road neighborhood that portrays
such an alpine style that you can't find in elsewhere as continually referred to by the P&Z
and staff? There are so many diverse comments. He reminded Council that he is one of
the last lots to build on in this neighborhood. There are no two buildings over there that
are alike. This building is eclectic of what is being built today. At the last P&Z meeting
he was told by different P&Z members that he should relate to the buildings to the east,
others told him to relate to the buildings to the west but not look like them because they
don't like that anymore. He was told not to look like the Pet Center. Mr. Donaldson
stated he didn't get it. One P&Z member said the problem with the building is the height,
the architectural style, and the massing, then later it's not the building height.
Mr. Donaldson agreed with Mr. Evans, he was told in the conceptual review that they
may have problems with the architectural style.
Mr. Donaldson referred to some photographs that he took from various locations. He
pointed out that from I-70 Chambertin appears flat roofed. It is a single line, not broken.
Mr. Donaldson broke up his roof line. He noted that his roof line is not stick on
architecture, they are solid wall forms.
Mr. Donaldson stated he has not had a final design review approval on this site in 12
years. He has presented 2 or 3 designs over 12 years, but withdrew them because of the
market. He did present a project about 1 '/Z years ago with inclined roofs. He and Mr.
Page 6 of 14
0 •
Weber did consider putting in $80,000 to $90,000 worth of drilled piers and just dealing
with it. He does not want to do that today.
Mr. Donaldson stated that many of Mr. Evans comments began with "I think" and "to
me". He stated that he has tried to take the personalization out of this process in his
presentations. He does not want someone else to design his building for him. He
presented the building asking the P&Z to determine whether or not his design conformed
to the design regulations. There are some very subjective issues.
Mr. Donaldson commented on how the process, as the applicant, went for him. Mr.
Donaldson began to make comments regarding the staff. Mayor Yoder told Mr.
Donaldson that the comments were not necessary. Mr. Donaldson stated that for the
record he felt the staff issues were germane to the ultimate decision.
Councilor Reynolds asked Mr. Donaldson if there were any other changes he was
planning to make to the building besides the wood elements on the front. Mr. Donaldson
pointed out on the model the changes he is proposing.
Mayor Protem McIlveen asked Mr. Donaldson if there was anything that could be done to
the front of the building to make it appear more in the same vane as the surrounding
buildings. The building does have a bit of a commercial feel. (Mr. Donaldson made his
comments away from the microphone and is able to transcribe.) Mr. Donaldson stated
that there is a lot of detail to the building.
Councilor Reynolds asked what the height of the building would be. Mr. Donaldson
stated just over 34 feet.
Mr. Donaldson stated that there is a lot of unnecessary detail, changes in materials that
other projects in the neighborhood don't have. He stated that he takes a lot of pride in his
design.
Councilor Benson stated he does have some problem with the solid roof line and made
suggestions to step the roof up in spots. Mr. Donaldson stated he can lower some of the
walls by a few inches and raise some others to the 35 feet to create more difference.
Mr. Donaldson stated there were some very strong staff related issues. He stated he feels
those dynamics have effected the outcome.
Mr. Evans stated for the record that he was informed by staff that he was factually
incorrect representing that there was a final design review approval on the Night Star
residences 1 %i to 2 years ago. There was preliminary and concept design reviews done
on that project. He apologized for the mistake. His intent tonight is to represent, as
factually as he can, the decision of the P&Z as a whole. Mr. Evans stated it is not a
personal thing on his side as it is not on Mr. Donaldson's side. He just wants to get the
P&Z decision out in a way that is understood.
Page 7 of 14
• •
There being no further comments, Mayor Yoder closed the public hearing and asked
Council for their comments.
Councilor McDevitt commented on the pitched roof and the design that had been
previously approved.
Councilor Benson stated his only concern is the consistently solid flat roof. He does have
a problem that we approved the Chambertin 20 years ago and if someone came today
wanting to put the exact same building there that we would say no it doesn't conform.
Mayor Yoder asked Town Attorney Levin if Council had the option to overturn the denial
and ask for changes on the building as Mr. Donaldson is suggesting. Mr. Levin referred
to the Avon Municipal Code and read the section referring to appeals. Based on his
findings, he feels it is problematic for the applicant to make changes on the design for
Council's approval today without them having been submitted for review by P&Z. His
advice to Council is to make an up or down decision on the P&Z decision. Mr. Levin
stated that the Council should not be approving subject to adding more wood, sloping the
roof, etc., because he would wonder if there would be enough on the record if we have to
go back and determine whether the applicant stayed within the conditions that the
Council put on today. There would not be the paperwork available that is normally
submitted with the application. To approve it just by saying put more wood on the
building is not specific enough.
Councilor Cuny stated in lieu of the Chambertin project and all the money spent to fix
that project, he sees this as a viable option. The flat roof does not bother him considering
the reasons for it, for removing the water. It's appearance with the other projects in the
neighborhood, there are so many different things in that area that he does not think you
could logically argue that this building is any better or worse than anything that is there.
Councilor Reynolds stated he appreciates what Mr. Donaldson is doing regarding the
disturbance on the lot. He asked Mr. Donaldson if there was any way to dramatize the
articulation any more and bring the project back with the wood changes to the P&Z. If
so, Councilor Reynolds would like to see that rather than the Council designing the
project because the P&Z then would not get a chance to see that.
Town Attorney Levin stated in the event of a remand, the agreement of the applicant
should be sought.
Town Manager Efting stated if it does get remanded back to P&Z it should be with
specific items attached stating what should be reviewed and not the entire project from
the beginning.
Town Attorney Levin explained the process of the remand.
Page 8 of 14
•
Councilor Cuny asked that if the project is sent back to the P&Z with certain conditions
and those are the only things the P&Z are going to look at, are we saying then that the
project is approved if these conditions are met or is the whole thing starting over again if
it is sent back to P&Z? Mr. Levin stated by remanding the Council is saying they neither
affirm or reverse, you vacate what the P&Z has done thus far and tell them to reconsider
the application. The Council can tell the P&Z to remand in view of the stated
considerations.
Mayor Yoder stated in the past when the Council has remanded, it has been very specific
of what the items were and was not allowed to just start over. Mr. Levin stated in
remanding to ask the P&Z to consider other factors is not the same as saying approve if
these conditions are met. The Council is not the review board, you wouldn't remand and
direct them one way or the other. You would remand to exercise their judgement.
Mayor Protem McIlveen felt they are getting close to a decision. He has no problem with
the flat roof. With everything that is going on on Nottingham Road, nothing matches so
he is not concerned with that. He has a feel that something needs to be done to break up
the massing and make it feel more residential and less commercial.
Councilor Reynolds agreed that it does look more commercial than residential.
Mayor Protem McIlveen questioned how Council could remanded it back to P&Z with
certain guidelines, saying the project would be approved with certain changes. He is not
sure how to do that without designing the building.
Town Attorney Levin stated regardless of what happens today, the applicant is free to
bring a new design or modified design up through the system and back before the P&Z.
Mr. Donaldson stated he is appealing the decision and is not here to file a new
application. Mr. Levin agreed but if the appeal is denied, Mr. Donaldson is free to submit
a modified application. Mr. Donaldson agreed that is one of his options, but to file an
application and create the new design and go through the meetings would be too long.
Mayor Yoder asked Mr. Donaldson if he would prefer a vote to uphold or overturn. Mr.
Donaldson accepted the notion to go back to P&Z with very specific issues for
consideration. He believes that modifying the decision of the P&Z could easily include
adding wood in certain spots, stepping the walls, etc. Take good notes. Lets agree on
what we are agreeing to.
Mr. Donaldson discussed his project pointing out items on the model and answering to
the Council's concerns. He also discussed some photos he took of the model. Mr.
Donaldson stated he has many more breaks in his massing than the neighboring
buildings.
Mayor Yoder stated the discussions are getting into designing the buildings and asked if
the suggestions could be made in a way that the Council could vote on the issue.
Page 9 of 14
0
LJ
Councilor Benson questioned if more wood could be added to some areas in place of
stucco. Mr. Donaldson stated it could.
Councilor Reynolds stated where the building seems most linear is at the roof line and the
massing in the center. Brining in a roof across the decks and adding wood detail would
break up the massing.
Mayor Protem McIlveed stated if we remanded back to P&Z with the fact that the flat
roof is not necessarily the issue but we would like to see it broken up a little more, more
wood, that would be general but he does not know how to not be general and not design
the building.
Town Attorney Levin suggest that if Council is considering remanding back to P&Z, that
Council ask the applicant if he has any objection to a remand. Mayor Yoder asked Mr.
Donaldson if he had any objection to a remand. Mr. Donaldson stated yes if it is not
conditioned very specifically. He will accept a remand if they can agree on the
conditions.
Town Attorney Levin stated with conditions it becomes problematic. He suggested
putting in an order that the matter is remanded to P&Z for reconsideration in light of the
comments of Council at its meeting tonight. Mayor Yoder pointed out that Mr.
Donaldson does not want that.
Councilor Benson asked if Mr. Donaldson made the changes suggested tonight and went
back to the P&Z and they still denied it, is it possible for him to appeal back to the
Council and we could approve it? Town Attorney Levin stated that is a possibility.
Town Attorney Levin stated it will be more than Mr. Donaldson coming back to the P&Z
with the changes that Council wants to see. He has to modify the application to bring it
in line with the written documentation required in all cases where there is an application
for a design review approval. Any applicant seeking design review has to comply with
the rules. It could become very confusing if we start conditioning what P&Z should
consider.
Mayor Yoder asked Mr. Donaldson for his suggestion of how this could be resolved. Mr.
Donaldson recommended that Council give specific comments on changes. He can then
change the drawings by the end of this week. He stated that since the staff did not unroll
the 30 day application until the Friday morning before the Tuesday meeting, he does not
think there would be too much difficulty in reviewing this. If the Council so desires to
remand it to the P&Z, he will have the drawings revised and depicted, and the colors
picked out in the character of what was discussed tonight.
Mayor Yoder asked what the timeframe is that staff has to receive the changes and have it
heard on the following meeting. Community Development Director Matzko stated
Page 10 of 14
• •
typically on a project that has already been reviewed, they shorten the time frame. Staff
would not hold it to the 30 day deadline. Mr. Matzko stated for the record, the staff did
not unroll the plans the Friday before the meeting. That is factually incorrect and he does
not know the basis for that. It is simply not true and he wants that on the record.
Mr. Donaldson stated that he stands on his statement based on a phone conversation with
Town Planner George Harrison.
Town Manger Efting stated since this is not a normal situation, the Council can make an
exception that this must be put on the agenda for next Tuesday's P&Z meeting if the
applicant agrees to it and they receive the information. If it has to be hand delivered on
Saturday, then so be it. He feels then that if it doesn't work out Mr. Donaldson's appeal
will continue to our next regular Council meeting and then he may get a vote of it
standing on it's merits. He does not like the direction the Council is going as far as
planning the project. As part of the motion from Council, it will be made a priority with
the P&Z to look at it at the next P&Z meeting because it must be very specific if we are
going this direction. One way or the other it is going to slow the applicant down two
weeks.
Town Attorney Levin suggested that Council could move to adjourn for the day and not
make a decision today.
Mr. Donaldson asked P&Z Chairman Evans if P&Z would reconsider the project based
on the changes requested by Council. Mr. Evans stated as a P&Z member, some of the
issues he is hearing are problematic. First, he appreciates the direction the Council and
applicant are trying to work toward, there are a lot of issues that should the Council
decide to approve the design with modifications, it leaves the whole bag open. There are
no color numbers, wood species defined. There are a lot of undefined items that are
required in the design review process. Mr. Evans stated the reason for the P&Z denial is
not because there wasn't wood. He would have a hard time going back to the P&Z and
telling them the only thing they are allowed to look at is did he add wood to these
columns. If that is the case, then that is a checklist item the staff can do. It is hard for
P&Z to review a project with their hands tied. He is more than willing to work with the
applicant and review the project in its entire context, but as the Chairman of the P&Z, he
cannot in good faith say yes send it back to P&Z and we will only look at certain
elements. The real issue is did the P&Z do the right thing in denying the final design
approval. If there is something that can make it better, then the only decision he can see
is that the Council should uphold the P&Z decision of denial.
Town Attorney Levin stated it is the Council choice to either affirm the decision outright,
reverse it outright, table for 30 days, or remand it back to P&Z for reconsideration if the
applicant agrees. Remand in consideration in view of a new application from the
applicant.
Page 11 of 14
• s
Councilor Cuny stated he would like to see this process take no more than 2 weeks, worst
case.
Councilor Cuny motioned, as confirmed by Town Attorney Levin, to hold the matter over
for reconsideration at the next meeting two weeks from now. Councilor Cuny confirmed
adding that special consideration is allowed to the applicant in the form allowing him to
get his materials in by Friday at 5:00 PM for consideration at the next P&Z meeting on
June 15, 1999. Then it can come back to Council two weeks from today, June 8, if
necessary. The motion was seconded by Councilor Reynolds.
Mayor Yoder asked for a roll call.
The motion carried with Councilor McDevitt voting against the motion.
Ordinances:
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 99-08, Series of 1999, An Ordinance Approving an
Amendment to the Wildridge PUD and Approving the Point View PUD Development
Plan and Development Standards, for Lot 111, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Town of
Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
Mayor Yoder stated this is a public hearing.
Town Planner Karen Griffith stated this PUD establishes five single family lots on Lot
111, Block 1, Wildridge. At first reading, Council directed that the two lock off units be
eliminated. The applicants have made that change. Staff recommends approval of the
ordinance.
There being no further comments from the public, Mayor Yoder closed the public
hearing.
Councilor Reynolds asked if the applicant met the 50% impervious lot coverage. Ms.
Griffith stated staff will be sure that is clarified on the plans.
Councilor Benson motioned approval of Ordinance No. 99-08, Series of 1999, with the
modification that the site coverage is less than 50% coverage of impervious materials.
Councilor Reynolds seconded the motion.
Mayor Yoder asked for a roll call.
The motion carried unanimously.
Resolutions:
Page 12 of 14
0 0
Resolution No. 99-22, Series of 1999, A Resolution Approving the Preliminary Plat, A
Resubdivision of Lot 111, Block 1, Wildridge, Town of Avon, Eagle County, Colorado
Mayor Yoder stated this is a public hearing.
Town Engineer Norm Wood stated this is a preliminary plat in conjunction with
Ordinance No. 99-08, Series of 1999. Recommended conditions for approval of the
preliminary plat include 1) that it be contingent upon the approval of Ordinance No .99-
08; 2) when final plat is submitted, they have a document adequately addressing how the
common access easement will be constructed and maintained since it is a common access
to all five lots created.
There being no further comments from the public, Mayor Yoder closed the public
hearing.
Mayor Protem McIlveen motioned approval of Resolution No. 99-22, Series of 1999.
Councilor Reynolds seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
Town Manager Report:
Town Manager Efting presented a video of the fire department resident training that was
featured on channel 9 news.
Consent Agenda:
a.) Approval of May 25, 1999 Council Meeting Minutes
b.) Contract with Vail Valley Medical Center for Nutrient Analysis
Services
C.) Contract with C.J. Chenier for the August Concert Series
d.) Financial Matters
Councilor Buckley motioned approval of the Consent Agenda. Councilor Benson
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilor Benson motioned
to adjourn. Councilor McDevitt seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:32 PM.
Page 13 of 14
0 EXHIBIT A 0
Memo
To: Honorable Mayor & Town Council
From Chris Evans, Chairman, Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission
CC: Bill Efting, Mike Matzko
Date: 06/08/99
Re: Appeal for Lot 47, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision
On 1 June 1999, the Planning & Zoning Commission voted to deny final design approval for this project by a vote of
4 - 2 based on it boxy and massive nature which made it incompatible with the surrounding neighborhood and as
viewed from public rights-of-way. However, the events leading up to the denial merit some review as this project
received not only a negative final design review, but a negative concept review as well.
1. Before submitting for the concept review, which was held by the Planning & Zoning Commission on 4 May
1999, the applicant was advised by staff that the project did not ft the surrounding neighborhood given its
differing architectural style.
2. At the concept review, the applicant was again told that the Planning & Zoning Comrission had
concerns about whether this project would fit the surrounding neighborhood. It was also stated, on the record,
that this project was not likely to be approved in its presented style. The applicant asked us to keep an open
mind until the model was presented at Final Design Review.
3. Final Design review was held by Planning & Zoning Commission on 1 June 1999. ;Rwomappmmyrdid a!
At that time, the project was denied by a 4 - 2 vote.
The basis for denial was that the project is not architectural compatible with surrounding properties, not only
Chamberlin to the west, but the greater area as a whole. The Planning & Zoning Commission felt that this
project presents itself as very boxy and massive in its appearance and the all stucco fagade exaggerates this
tendency. Given the prominent point on which it sits, and thus its visual impact on the Town and surroundmg
areas, the Planning & Zoning Commission found this project to be in conflict with our design review criteria.
Other items considered by the Planning & Zoning Commission include the fad that the last two projects approved
along Nottingham Road incorporate more traditional "Alpine" style elements, such as steeply pitched roofs, wood
and stone accents and a greater mix of materials. While we will not deny that this is, to some, a very attractive
building, the Planning & Zoning Commission felt that this building is more suited to a transitional role adjacent to the
Avon Pet Centre than in the middle of a non-architecturally compatible neighborhood.
Finally, it is important to point out that the vote of 4 - 2 for denial does not mean that 2 Commissioners voted for
approval. Under other business, Commissioner Fehlner, who was part of the minority on this vote, clarified that she
did not support the project due the amount of site disturbance proposed. Shed voted against the proposed motion
solely because she did not agree on the issue of architectural massing and style. Therefore, in its present state, 5
Commission members are opposed to this project.
Page 1 of 1
11
s
Y SUBMITTED:
APPROVED:
Jim Benson
Debbie Buckley
Rick Cuny
Mac McDevitt
Bob McIlveen
Buz Reynolds
Judy Yoder
Nash, Town
Page 14 of 14