Loading...
PZC Minutes 072093C7 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20, 1993 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on July 20, 1993, at 7:35 P.M. in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Mui&ipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Perkins. Members Present: John Perkins, Jack Hunn, Patti Dixon, Sue Railton, Henry Vest Buz Reynolds, Rhoda Schneiderman Staff Present: Rick Pylman, Consultant Norm Wood, Town Engineer Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary, Vari Reichardt, Assistant Secretary Chairman Perkins stated all members were present. Lot 28, Block 4. Wildridge Subdivision. McIntosh Residence, Response to Commission Conditions Final Design Review Rick Pylman stated that the council granted approval of project in May of 1992 for FDR, Coyote Ridge. There were a few conditions this residence was assigned; one of them in particular regarding the garage that sits off to the side. In order to access the doors on the side of the garage the applicant at that time wished to pave up to them, right next to the property line. The Board said that if he were to pave, he would need to get the approval of his next-door neighbor, because it was so close to the property line. What the applicant wishes to do now is just build a 4' wide sidewalk to access the doors on the side which lead into a storage area. This allows him about 10 feet of landscaping which he can do on his own property line. He will transport 10 of the Rabbit Brush plants, which he had to remove during construction, into this area. He suggested that it was a good solution for this area. The second issue that was to be brought back to staff was regarding the light boards. There is a stucco column in which the lights will be recessed under the cap on three sides in which the light will be thrown and not shine onto the street. The final change was that the building was about 1 foot too high. Rick says that the drawings show the previous elevations of the roof, and the revised drawings are upstairs if they PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 2 Lot 28 Block 4 Wildridge Subdivision McIntosh Residence Response to Commission Conditions Final Design Review. (cont.) need to see them. This change is in compliance with the heights required, and Rick recommends approval John Perkins asked Mr. McIntosh if he wished to add to Rick Pylman's introduction. Mr. McIntosh stated "no". John said that everything looked good to him and asked for comments. Jack Hunn asked, if Mr. McIntosh were unsuccessful in transplanting would he replace them with comparable material. Mr. McIntosh said yes. Patti Dixon moved to graut Final Design Approval of Lot 28, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision on condition of resubmittal. Hack Hunn seconded the motion. The motion carried with a unanimous vote. Eaglebend Meter Locations, Design Review Rick Pylman began by reviewing the issue. He stated that there is an existing bank of meters at the Alpines at Eaglebend, and although "we" did not ask "we" assumed that the electric meters would go on the building. This issue has surfaced up late, and there are other places as well that have to deal with their meter locations. There are four meters in this particular bank and the Planning and Zoning Commission and one of the new property owners had a concern about the unsightly location of the meters. "We" discussed possible ways to hide the meters with landscaping. The developer, Jeff Spinel, has decided that it would be most appropriate to take the meters and install them on the buildings where "we" originally thought they were going. The letter in all of the board members packets that states that and shows the location on the homes. Since it was originally thought that the building was where the meters were to go, so this should be the end of the issue. John Perkins asked if anyone wanted to add to this. He also personally commended Jeff on the decision. Rhoda Schneiderman also wished to commend Jeff on this decision. Rhoda Schneiderman moved the approval for the relocation of the electrical meters on the buildings at Eaglebend. Patti Dixon seconded the motion. The motion passed with a unanimous decision. PANNWG AND•7,0NfNG COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES ,.Ju13�,3993 Wage 3 -Lot 21 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Slifer Designs Sign -'roam_ -O nurg_e Rick Pylman opened his introduction asking all to recall the new sign program of the Avon Commercial Building, while it was still under the ownership of Brian Pesh. Under this program the sign square footage was based on the lease area of each business within the building. There has been some interior remodeling and tenant changes, so it was thought that an update was needed for the sign program. Pat Slifer, following completion of our Avon Road Project, has determined that her visibility of her front door and awnings are not acceptable, and is requesting to put a Slifer Design sign above and to the left of the Christy Sports sign on the end of the building that faces towards the annex. She does have the square footage allowance but the Sign Program did not specifically designate this area as place to put a sign, so you would be amending the program for this sign. In amending this you will be revising the square footage allowances for the other tenants. That does not affect any existing signs on the building. Also, on the office entrance there is some blue canvas banners with tenant names on it. One of them still bears the name of a real estate tenant that is no longer there. This would be replaced, and some of the other tenant names would be added to the canvaL. Not all of the tenants wish to have signs, but, those wiio do will be accounted for. Rick thinks it's an appropriate amendment to the sign program, and "we" are recommending approval. The Slifer Design will be similar to the Christy Sports sign with Pan Channel letters and no unseen light source. Charles Smith, consultant to Slifer Designs, stated that the staff report spoke for itself, but if there were any questions he was there to answer them. Charles Smith did want to mention, however, that, depending on how the square footage is determined, if the space between Slifer and Design were included in the square footage it might be more than 63 square feet. In any case, Charles says they will be under the 70.5 square feet that is necessary under the sign program. John Perkins asked for comments. Jack Hunn commented that the letters size on some of the tenants would be only three inches tall. Charles said that was for the canvas, and for the sign program outline it prorates the size according to the square foot lease. The largest sign after Slifer Design is eight square feet maximum. There are really two major tenants there, Christy and Slifer, and the rest are small office space. Jack Hunn asked if the sign would be in addition to the existing sign. Charles said it would be an addition to Christy's sign. Jack said "But would the awning at the Slifer Design's entrance remain? And what color would it be?" Charles' answer was yes, it would remain. and the color would be red letters. Patti asked if they would be the same design material as the Christy Sports sign. Charles said yes. P► PANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 4 Lot 21, Blk 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Slifer Designs,Sign Program Change_(cont). John asked if the letters would be the same style. Charles answer was they would be different, but the same method of construction. It would be in Slifer logo style, but still has the same conservative lettering. Buz Reynolds wanted to be clear as to if the sign on the awning would come off, or remain. Charles stated that he was not aware that there was lettering on the awning. His guess was that Slifer would like to keep this signage for pedestrian traffic. However, the two together would not exceed the 70.5 square feet maximum required. Talk between Rick Pylman and Charles continued regarding the size of the sign on the awning. They determined that it was not over 7 feet. If it was over Charles assured the Board that they would comply with the Program's requirements. Henry Vest asked where exactly the sign would fit within the triangle of the roof. On the site tour he noted the small amount of space, and wondered if the sign would fit. Charles said it would be within the triangle, it would not extend beyond the roof line, but it would be slightly higher and to the east. I.emy wanted to know if the exact feet were available. Charles said they were not provided to him, so he was not exactly sure of the elevation and feet. They will, however, make sure that there will be background left behind the sign so it will not bump up to the edge of the roof. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve Lot 21, Block 2, at Benchmark. Jack Hunn seconded it. Rick Pylman, however, wished to add more to the discussion. Norm had reminded him regarding the sheds in the back of the building in which the area needed clean up. Rick wished to condition the installation of the sign with the clean-up of the back area, and the shed comes through the design review process. Rhoda Schneiderman, however, felt that these two issues were completely separate. She said that if the clean-up and sheds were an issue they should come to the board as separate items from the sign. John concluded that the motions stand as stated. Jack Hunn, however, withdrew his 2nd motion. Sue Railton stepped in and motioned to approve Lot 21, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek with the amendment that all signage not exceed 70 square feet. The motions, thus, were first by Schneiderman, and 2nd by Henry Vest. John Perkins asked for further comment. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 5 Lot 21. Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Slifer Designs,Sign Program (cont). Jack Hunn did no think it was inappropriate that conditions be placed with current items on the property. John Perkins asked for other comment. When there was none he asked for the vote. The motion failed with a 4 to 3 vote. John then asked for another motion. Sue Railton moved that Lot 21, Blk. 2 of Benchmark be approved regarding the sign program with the conditions that the Slifer signage not exceed 70 square feet. Also, that Slifer come in and obtain approval of the storage sheds at the back of their building. Buz Reynolds 2nd the motion with the amendment regarding the clean-up. John asked for a vote and the motion carried with a 5 to 2 vote. Discussion with Charles included making him aware of exactly what these conditions are. Lot 14/15, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Final Design Review Rick Pylman began by explaining that this proposal was brought in for a Final Design Review at the last meeting after going through several Conceptual Design Reviews. The final analysis was denied by the Planning and Zoning Commission by a 5 to 2 vote. The three issues that were of concern to the Commission was 1. Parking grades; the steepness and access were difficult. 2. The general size of the building and 3. The landscaping plan. T.J. Conners is back before the board to accommodate these concerns. He has made some revisions to the building, first by shortening the building by 10 feet. He has done this by taking some of the internal staircases and moved them to the outside. He has also planed on increasing landscaping and snow storage area. The grading plan has been revised to take out some of the steepness of some of the parking areas. Some of the retaining wall design has been cleaned -up in its location to allow for a better grade. Some substantial landscaping has been added to the front in the parking area, as well as the side where the building was shortened. Rick did not reiterate all of the building material information, however, there was attached, for the Boards review, the previous memorandum that was submitted. Rick was able to remove all but one of the conditions the Board placed on this memorandum. T.J. had made some late additions to the grading that seemed acceptable, but Norm did not have much time to review. Rick left the condition regarding the grading for the Town Engineer to approve prior to building permit. The rest of the revisions were left to the Board to decide upon at the present meeting. T.J. Conners wished to add to Rick's address. After listening to the suggestions of last week, and talking to his architect, T.J. came up with the following: -The building size has been cut by 10 feet, and have moved the stairwells to the outside. The stairwells are going to be of the metal grate type and are for fire exits only. They will be as "see- through" as possible. 0040% ,O�, PANNING AND ZONING CONMUSSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 6 Lot 14/15. Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Final Design Review (cont.) Because of the extra 10 feet reduction in the building, more room is allowed for snow removal/storage. He has counted 9,000 square feet of available room for snow storage, not including the lower parking lot (which was pointed out that it was not a good idea for snow storage). Because the budget has an excess of $1,000.00/mth. for snow removal the company will end up buying a Caterpillar, which will allow snow to be lifted up and over the walls into the 9,000 feet of storage area. Landscaping has an area increase amount of trees to 40 and will place 60 juniper trees in. There will be no storing of snow on top of any trees. These trees will be irrigated. The grade has been reduced from 8% to 4%. On the steep grade T.J. has thought of placing a wall that would serve as a sign to access either the North or South Building. Dumpsters and entry signs will be made out of the same drywall material as the building so they will match. The building will be a continual, consistent coloring. Regarding the retaining walls, discussed last week, T.J. is still favoring the rock gavian on the rear of the building, and the hem stone. The signage has already been drawn up in the condominium declaration and can be found written up in the last paragraph. This concludes the summary. Jack Hunn wanted to commend T.J. for listening and responding. He felt that the project had come a long way and is now reasonable in terms of site constraints and snow storage. He did want to make a few suggestions and questions: number one, on the legend of the map all of the spruce trees are the same size; Jack would like them varied (it was then agreed to vary them 6 to 10 feet). Number two, regarding the signs on the retaining walls, is there going to be a light source for night time viewing? T.J. was not sure what it would be, whether back lighting or spot lighting, and was open for suggestions. John Perkins mentioned that T.J. was going to have to come back for a sign program, so the lighting issue would be dealt with then. The Commission doesn't design signs very well. Jack Hunn wanted to know about the material going onto the retaining wall in which T.J. was leaning toward the Rock Gavian. T.J. said the reason behind his decision was that sooner or later there was going to be cars or trucks hitting the walls and the ablestone he had chosen would more than likely crumble away. At some point in the height of the wall, therefore, there will have to be concrete. Jack Hunn asked how it would be finished. T.J. was somewhat vague on his ideas, but was planning to place the concrete in a four foot section then finish the outside with some type of drywall so it would not be noticed. The discession continued regarding the concrete wall and its finished look. The one good solution that was derived was to stain the concrete. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 7 Lot 14/15, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Final Design Review (cont.) John questioned T.J. regarding the stairwells that he said were proposed. They were not shown on the plans available. T.J. corrected John by pointing them out on the top drawing. Once he saw them he defined them as an open -scissors stair, and asked if they were going to be painted. The answer was yes. They all thought that T.J. had done a good job. and Buzz Reynolds moved that all approve Lot 14/15, Block 1, of Benchmark Subdivision. John wanted to add the condition regarding the grading. Rick said to include condition one of the previous staff memo. Rhoda Schneiderman 2nd the motion, and approval was voted unanimous. Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duples. Roofing* Material Change. Handrail Review, Final Design Review Rick Pylman said that the building is under construction, and there is one issue that needed to come back to the Design Review. At the time of Final Design Review a specific handrail detail had not been included. Mr. Vedder did not know what he was going to do about it at that time. Rick did include a detail of the railing in the Boards packets on the staff reports. There is also a materials change on the type of shingle on the roof. The new shingle being proposed is the Tamko Heritage Premium Shadow line composite shingle. It is on the house that is next door to this residence. Rick, however, was not sure of the color. Mr. Vedder then passed out the samples to the Board and pointed out the one that had correct color. They described it as being blue/gray or pewter in color. Jack Hunn wanted to know if it was the 300 pound type, and Mr. Vedder said he was not sure, but it was the heaviest that the company made; around 360. The sample is of the lighter material, but correct in color. Both Sue Railton and Rhoda Schneiderman then asked about the railings. Mr. Vedder apologized that he did not have samples of the materials to bring, but his supplier in Denver did not get them to him in time. When asked if he had pictures, again his answer was no. He did, however, take the liberty of describing the railing. It is a 3 inch cylindrical cross-section with a grove extruded into it, which would pass horizontally into a bezel attaching to the parapets on either side with a vinyl gasket. A tempered glass light would be inserted between the upper and the lower railing which is exactly the same size. Everything will be done and set in. The color will be a bronze - anodized -the same color as the fixed glass openings and the doors. More discussion included the spacing and the stantions, with one balcony that will have a 6 to 7 foot layout, and the other with an 8 to 9 feet stantion. oaww► PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 8 Lot 45 Block 3 Wildridge Subdivision Vedder Duplex Roofing Material Change Handrail Review Final Design Review (cont.) The top two tubs that run horizontal will be code height of 36 inches, and the bottom will be up off the deck sufficient to get the snow off of the deck. Glass will be in-between except the sides, which will be held back 4 inches so a rhythm can be obtained. Discussion regarding the reflectivity of the glass began with Jack Hunn. Mr. Vedder said that he addressed the issue in his letter and was not as current as lie would like to be since the letter was written quite some time ago. The glass, however, comes to less than 5% additional facing glass towards the south. Much of this is aligned with glass behind it. The original drawing does show the glass wrapping around the entire width of the balconies. However, they decided to bring the stucco over to the south line, so that only the south side has the glass. In this regard they have made a reduction from the original plans. There is a lot of overhang which the flat drawing will not show. This overhang will stop a lot of the reflective light. Also, the more vertical the angle one has the less reflectivity occurs. Rhoda mentioned that most of the other houses are faced away from these windows anyway. In order to see such reflective light one would have to be looking out the back door or be on the street. Jack Hunn said he had a pretty clear vision of what was going to be done, and he felt that it was going to be a very high quality railing system. Jack Hunn motioned to approve the Lot 45, Block 3, Wildridge railing system, and include the roof material change. Henry Vest 2nd the motion, and the proposal carried unanimously. John Perkins was going to proceed with Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision, but Charlette mentioned that Mr. Barrows was there at 7:00 and wanted to go eat. John said they would return to it then. Lot 28. Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision Orcutt Duplex Final Design Review Rick asked :or time to put up drawings, so John provided a 5 minute recess. John Perkins called the meeting back to order. Rick stated that the Orcutt house is a single family house with a caretaker. John is now back for a Final Design Review with color elevations, color renderings, a sight plan, and a landscape plan available for a review. Rick then reviewed the staff report on the project with the members of the staff, which included the asphalt drive, plant sizes that were corrected from the Conceptual Design that meet size criteria, electric meters and gas meters will be placed on the building, and the building PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 9 Lot 28, Block 1. Wildridae Subdivision, Orcutt Duplex_ Final Design Review (cont.) meets all set -back requirements, and is well under the height requirements of 25 feet. John will present the exact colors. Rick stated that as far as issues with the staff exact colors, fascia, and trim details are necessary. Rick thought it was a complete application and recommends approval. The applicant did wish to add to Rick's statements. According to last meetings suggestions all of the roof pitches have been brought up to a 6 pitch roof. On the south side of the house there was a question at the last meeting regarding the sea of asphalt going across the top. The applicant has now broken this up with a giant dormer which goes over the lagoon section of the house. Also, there was a comment regarding having too much siding on the house. The siding on the dormer, however, will brake the monotony by placing stucco that will go all the way up. and all of the exposed concrete will be covered in stucco. The roof line has been changed to make it more interesting; the big dormer tips out a bit at the top. The over -hang in front of the garage tips out more also; from 2 feet to the now changed 4 feet. This will match the dormer. Also, there is a 4x4 spoke design in the gables of the garage, the gable above this, and inside the dormer. Sky lights have been placed on the roof, and the roof pitches have been changed from a 4 pitch to a 6 pitch. It doesn't look like a double trailer anymore. A redwood, solid body stain for the trim has been added. The applicant brought in three samples to show his choices. The Country Redwood is the solid body stain color he wishes to use. He also has pictures of a house on the Vail Golf Course that has the exact same color scheme that he wishes to use. He will use the Rustic Redwood Heritage Shingle on the roof and the chimney will be stucco. He said that he is excited about this house and can't wait to move in. John asked for comments from the board. Sue Railton felt that it was a great improvement. Rhoda Schneiderman felt that the landscaping should be revised to place many more aspens on the lot. She wished to see at least 3 or 4 more spruce and 6 or 7 more aspen trees. Henry Vest asked if there was a window to the garage. There was a no response. Henry said that when he came to the board for his garage they had him put a window in, and now he is glad that he has one. He says the visibility is necessary. The second detail was regarding the chimney. He wanted to know the cap detail on it. Mr. Orcutt said that it was just decorative. Also, for decoration, on the North side the siding runs vertical. All of the windows will be accented. Patti asked what finish the spoke detail was going to be. The answer was Chamois. All of the accents around the body, decks, and spokes will the same color. Patti then asked if there was an irrigation system. The answer was a drip system on all of the trees. The lawn area will be very small so he will take care of it since he will be the one living there. 1 24 ?0 11 PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 10 Lot 28 Block 1 Wildridge Subdivision. Orcutt Duplex, Final Design Review (cont.) The question then was raised by Patti about lighting on the deck. Mr. Orcutt said there will be no spot lighting, just courtesy lights on each side. Because it is very wide open he felt that only the required minimum lights for all exits/entrances were necessary. Jack Hunn felt that it was a great improvement also, but, wanted consideration regarding snow removal; such as a gutter or a diverter. The answer was that a snow fence would suffice. With the plans there is information regarding the study that was done on snow removal and a snow fence was determined to suffice, if there were a problem. Jack wanted to know why, if there were a 2 foot difference between the 2 shed roofs, Mr. Orcutt would not bring those two roofs to meet each other. Mr. Orcutt responded by pointing out the sea of asphalt that was to be avoided in the last meeting. He needed to brake up the asphalt. The spoke detail was also of concern, and Mr. Orcutt said that the spoke detail in the dormer will tip out with it just a little. The spoke will be held back a foot so a vertical line can be better attempted at. Jack Hunn had the same comments regarding the landscaping as Rhoda did. The rebuttal was that the piece of property with the lawn included was only about 20 feet wide, making the enihe lot. He did, however, have a professional landscaper coming in to help him plan out his area. The west side of the house will be an aspen forest and he will keep the front and south side as a lawn. Jack wished to know also if the soffits and the fascia were the same color as the siding. Yes, was the answer, with one accent strip. Verification of the shingles were the next item of conversation which the staff report detailed. Buz Reynolds wanted to clear up the colors, and then also made the suggestion that the garage have a window. Even thought there is another house close to that side. John Perkins wanted to knowwhat color the garage was going to be. Mr. Orcutt wanted to leave it up to the board, but wanted either the same color as the siding, which he preferred, or the color of the accent. He said it was a textured wood grain door. The color was not decided upon, but John did agree that the garage did need a window or two so that it would look like it is a part of the house. He also feels that the roof line should be brought up to make a gabble connection, despite the comment regarding the sea of asphalt. One other question came from Jack Hunn if the windows were manufactured windows or not. The answer was yes. John stared that any motion needed to include a final landscape plan to be brought back before the board; and that a window be included in the garage. r"'* PANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION MEETING MINIJTES July 20,1993 Page 1 I Lot 28, Block 1, Wildridee Subdivision, Orcutt Duplex, Final Design Review (cont,) Patti Dixon moved that all approve the proposal of Lot 28, Block 1, Wildridge with the conditions that a landscaping plan be drawn up with more plants, and that two windows be placed in the garage. Sue Railton 2nd the motion. Further discussion included Buz's question regarding the size that the windows would be. Mr. Orcutt said that he would match the ones in the bedroom. John thus clarified the condition that the windows match the bedroom. The motion passed with a unanimous vote. Lot 6 Block 5 Wildridgee Subdivision Barrows Six Units Final Design Review Rick began by stating that this project was seen at Conceptual Design, so he would not get too graphic. The Barrows is above the Town of Avon Project. It is two, Three, Plex buildings. With a steep lot zoned for 6 units. Rick then went over the staff report with all present, which included the grading report, size, slope, etc.. All of their requirements meet the criteria. The units themselves are bigger than the amount the staff reported; not 400 feet they are 800 feet. A specific shingle color was the only comment that Rick wished to point out, along with the manufacturer guarantee of the shingle weight, after he finished reading the details of the staff report to the Committee. Otherwise he recommended approval. The applicant then brought to the front the shingle sample he wished to use. He would like to get the Heritage shingles in a color that is as close to the display. He will make sure it is a heavy shingle, the sample he handed out was just to show the color. John made the comments that, one, the applicant changed one of roof pitches that was different, and made it the same as the other pitch; and two, the railing detail use to be and aspen detail, but is changed. The applicant said it is now white. The colors on the drawing submitted are the incorrect colors. All of the gray should be white. The handrail and spokes in the railing will be white. The only thing that will be different is the redwood on the deck. Everything else will be white. Actually he will go with an off/white. Rhoda Schneiderman seemed concerned regarding the box near the house. The applicant said that it was the du- .;rster which will be attached to the building according the the suggestions of the Committee from the last review. Also, the meters will be attached to the building within some sort of box. 60 PANNING AND ZONING COMM aS_ EETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 12 Lot 6 Block 5. Wildridge Subdivision. B .saws. Six units. Final Design Review (cont.) Patti Dixon asked regarding the irrigation system. He said that he would be using a drip irrigation for the trees, and rope -necks for the grass. He will be using the existing grasses. Rhoda said that if he were to replant wild grasses in the disturbed areas he would have to water a lot. John wanted to know if he had some sort of sod for the area since this was for 6 units. Because, however, the hillside is so steep, the applicant didn't feel it was a good idea. John agreed. The applicant did mention that when he excavates he will be digging into a wooded area. He hopes to save as many of the bigger trees as he can to transplant around the drive. He also will be planting Service Berry bushes and spruces. Rhoda Schneiderman moved that all approve Lot 6, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision, Barrows, Six Units as submitted. Patti Dixon 2nd the motion. Jack Hunn continued with further discussion of the motion with a question on exterior lighting. "Is there going to be an individual switch per unit or will there be a timer where the lights stay on all night up there?" The applicant said he was just going to leave it up to the tenants for their own lights. He will put lights on the patios according to codes. Jack asked if there were an entry sign. The answer was no, he did not wish to announce the apartments because they were just one bedrooms. Jack asked Rick if it was a requirement and Rick said no, just that the address be visible from the road for the fire dept. The vote was then taken with a unanimous approval. Lot 33. Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision. Klein/Sherwood Residence. Final Design Review Rick Pylman took the oration beginning with the three issues that the Committee had with the building during its Conceptual R -view. The first issue was the need to coord aate access with the adjacent lot #34, which is using an easement across the property to make access. This now has been done and there is a driveway plan that works very well for both lots. The second concern was were the utilities were going to go and what disturbance they might create. There is a site plan that show that the utilities go in two different directions. Previously disturbed trenches will run :dong the easements in which Rick feels will be appropriate. Jack had a comment regarding the stucco that ran around the back of the building. This has been addressed and Scott will bring it out in more detail. All of these three iss; aes, thus, have been addressed, so if there are any more questions Scott's hear to answer them. Scott Sherwood introduced himself as this proposals representative. In regards to the driveway, Scott provided plans showing the previous idea and what they have worked out now. he met with Rick last week with a site map from the neighbor. They then matched the grades and drainage accordingly. He Gari PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 13 Lot 33. Block I. Wildridge Subdivision. Klien/Sherwood Residence, Final Design Review cont. feels comfortable with what they not have accomplished with the plans. In regards to the stucco band across the house, Scott submitted some drawings but said Rick did not place them up for viewing. He grabbed his copy and showed the board where the change was made. Jack Hunn mentioned that this was his concern and it now looked good. Scott went on with the next concern regarding the utilities. The main concern was where the sewage was going to tie in, in conjunction with existing mains. Scott has made any excavation for the lines as minimal, so it would not scare any natural plantation that is there. The cable and telephone is accessed through the utility easement along the north side of the lot. He feels that the natural shrubbery that is intact will remain. The question Jack had asked was where is the garage fascia going to hand in regards to the 25 foot set back off of the cald-a-sack. Scott has submitted another plan showing the changes on this that is not up. He also submitted a letter that would describe this change in detail. Everything has been gone over with Rick and Norm regarding the suggestions made from the last meeting, so all seems to be in fine. John felt that it was nice house; he particularly liked the elevation with the arched windows and arched garage elements. Scott, in comment, was glad that the stucco band was mentioned, because he now likes the look of the revised drawings now much better. Further comments, coming from Jack, stated that the house was very nice. Jack did wish to point out that the landscape solution was only one-sided. Not all off the sides have been completely resolved. Even the south elevation facing the cald-a-sack is not quite complete. John wanted to know if an irrigation system was going to be used for the landscaping. Scott answered saying all that will be used is an exterior proto-type system of self watering. The lawn is very minimal; the front walk -out area being the actual lawn area. This area is near 32x20. The rest would be natural forest. Rhoda Schneiderman also agreed that the landscaping should be spread around the whole house. Staff should review the landscaping plan. The house does look great. Buz Reynolds moved that all approve the proposal as submitted with the condition of a landscape plait to be brourilit back in. Rhoda Schneiderman 2nd the motion. Jack dia have comments on the motion. He wished to know if the colors were correct from the plans. Scott said yes, there will be a solid color of paint around the brick mold of the windows. Semi- transparent stain on the fascia and the cedar soffit. They are currently using a very similar color scheme on the Green's project at Arrowhead. It is very appealing. All agreed. The vote then took place with a unanimous a,proval. a PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 14 Lot 104, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision, Final Design Review Maps were hung for viewing. w Rick began stated that it is called the Peel/Pressley duplex. It is a Final Design Review even though it was not seen as a Conceptual Design because it is a very complete final submittal. Color elevations, color samples, and exact material samples are available for viewing. It is also a very good site plan. The driveway is held at 10% slope. This is the lot that Jack asked about a week ago that had been cleared. Rick went on to cover the Staff Report with all present. Everything will be in good shape with all plans. Regarding the plant sizes, there is enough variation to meet the criteria for size. Meters will be on the building. There will be utilities that will need to be extended to the downhill side of the lot. There is an opportunity to move these utilities to the side and make use of the easements, in hopes that this can be shared. This will, thus, minimize the scaring on the hillside. Rick then described the building plan that was written up in the Staff Report. Included in the report are the colors of the exterior of the house and garage, as well as the height and roof form. Staff recommendation was for approval with no conditions. Don Pressley introduced himself. Questions from the board began v ith Jack Hunn. He asked why the lot was cleared. Don said that it was not suppose to happen. They were trying to clear the front because they had the potential of getting free dirt to make the driveway. When the excavator gave instructions to one of his workers the man misunderstood and cleared the entire site. Jack felt that this was very misfortunate because so much of the site could have been left undisturbed in its natural environment. He wanted to know then how Mr. Pressley was going to finish all of the disturbed areas. Don said that the man did not go much further beyond where the building was going to go anyway. He will have a much nicer back yard that can be replanted because some of the steepness had been taken out. Jack said that this yard does not show on the grading plans, though. Mr. Pressley said that Dave, drew up the plans as the worse case scenario because they did not know what they would have for dirt. The same thing happened to them when they built Lot 68; they ended up with so much cut out of it that they could put in a nice back yard. Don feels that when they are done they will not have as high of a back stair on the back of the house, the grade will be built up. Jack Hunn's concern with the suggestion of building the back yard platform up, is the transition of the platform back down to the original grade. "How steep that would be? Would it look like an engineered fill or would it have some natural" feel to it? Don felt it could be very natural. He just hopes to get a 20 to 25 foot back yard and then let slope back off to the natural grade. Patti Dixon asked if he were planning tr put irrigation on the area. Don said that he did not want to. He did the other lot that way and it woi ked out well. She asked about drip for the trees. Don said only if the board recommends it. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 15 Lot 104, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision Peel/Pressley. Duplex. Final Design Review (cont•; Rhoda Schneiderman said that a back yard would be envious for any home the Wildridge area, but she did not understand how anything would grow without irrigation. Even the drought resistant natural grasses need a lot of water before their root system takes hold and they become drought resistant. Rhoda felt that all of the sides but the Southwest corner are very attractive. Her desire though was to break-up the monotony of the decks and stairs that go in the same direction. She would like to see some variety. Maybe have the stairs come straight down on one side. At this point it looks almost institutional and linear, even though there is a small relief step. Don pointed out to Rhoda that the stairwell on the right comes off of the deck, whereas the one to the left will come off of the corner. One would enter the deck on the left through the living room and exit through a door on the landing. This will make the decks a 1/2 flight difference. Don intentionally changed the decks because he did not want two units to look alike. Don was satisfied with Dave providing him with two looks. Patti Dixon asked what the deck railing material and color was. Don said they were 2x2 in the Delta Fog color. The white will only be used for the doors and windows trim. Rhoda was still not happy with Don's explanation regarding the decks looking alike, stating that there may be a few steps off, but the line is exactly the same. Don added that he had not seen the rendering in detail. He was surprised when he saw it. He himself did not want a stairwell on the right. The deck comes out from the dining room area and comes around the corner. He never intended for it to come down to the ground. Buz Reynolds made a comment regarding the garage door on the south. He said it looked as though a bit of ice build-up. Buzz wondered if there was a way to put another door detail in there to shed the snow and ice off. Don said that the last house was thought to have the same problem when it was designed, but there was never a problem. This site has the same plan in the roof with the shady side of the building. They will have gutters on it. Don is attempting to make the duplex as different as he can to get away from having two look-alikes. John felt that it was a good house. He did not have any problems with it. Patti Dixon moved that all approve Lot 104, Block 1, Wildridge with the condition that an installation of a drip irrigation system be installed for the trees. Rhoda asked if colors were provided. Sue told her they were in front of her. Henry Vest 2nd the motion. Jack Hunn added to further comments on the motion that a grading plan be resubmitted to the staff regarding the yard. Just so there is a document that shows the intent. Rick also wanted to point out that the stairwell on the east side can be illuminated. Don agreed. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 16 Lot 104, Block I. Wildridge Subdivision, Peel/Pressley. Duplex, Final Design Review (cont.) Patti, thus, clarified that the motion be as submitted with the conditions of adding the drip irrigation on the trees and to resubmit the grading plan for approval. The stairwell on the east can be left or taken out, she did not mind the way the stairwells were on the plans. The vote passed unanimously. Don wanted to verify that the stairwells were O.K. if he were to sell the duplex and the new owners wanted the stairs. The staff said that was no problem. Lot 27/28_ Block 1_ Benchmark at Beaver Creek. Mountain Center, Final Design Review and Jerr�'s Automotive_ Special Review Use Review Rick introduced the proposal by stating that the Special Review Use Review was talked about at the staff level and it was determined that it could be done in a less formal manner than a New Review Use. There was no requirement of notification, or resubmittal of an application fee. All that needed to be brought up for is discussion and ratification of whether you will allow the use to continue or not. It is not a public hearing. John asked if a public motion to continue the use. Rick said yes. Rick continued saying that in 1986 the Planning and Zoning Commission granted a Final Design Approval to the Mountain Center, which was depicted as an 82,400 square foot three story warehouse and commercia. building. Phase 1 of the building was constructed. Although the applicant wants to go ahead wit:i Phase II, the original design approval for it has expired. so it does require an official action from the Planning and Zoning Comnassion. This would re -approve the original design. Sometime after Phase I was built the original plan for the basement of mini -storage was changed, and Jerry's Automotive's use was placed in the basement. This went through a Special Review Use procedure which was approved. Parking issues were looked at and a condition was placed on the Special Use permit that said at the time Phase II goes through, the Town should review and decide whether to continue the Special Use permit or not. Parking was the issue at that time. There are some minor site plan changes to the original approval. Originally, as the entire project will show, the parking lot was at a single grade. Some of the changes that have been made to Phase I, particularly Jerry's Auto Shop, if the owner wants to keep Jerry in there it will require the installation of a ramp. Instead of one continuous parking lot, at this point the originally planned parking will go into the existing building. There will be a ramp constructed to go into the lower level of the building, so one could drive down and into another level for parking. Therefore, parking lots will be isolated from each other. Other than that the building is being presented exactly as it was presented in 1986. There will be 5 bays in Phase I and 7 bays in Phase II for a total of 12. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 17 Lot 27/28, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Mountain Center, Phase II. Final Design Review cont. Rick went on to say that they did go through the parking issues at the last meeting. No one really had time to review it to see if parking was appropriate. There were some uses in Phase I that were allowed under a Blanket Special Review Use. Les Shapiro did provide us with parking information. Going through it, in Phase I is actually short a few parking spaces according to Town codes. Construction of Phase II, however, will clean this up. The total parking demand, assuming that all of Phase II goes to a warehouse use, would be 104 parking spaces. There are 115 proposed this is counting the demand of 26 parking spaces for the auto repair shop. This is based on 3 spaces per 1000 square feet. Ph, -,e H will then help parking. Staff did recommend approval of this Final Design project with some conditions. The building owner will be removing 15 to 20,000 cubic yards of excess material on the site. There is some concern of the structural integrity of this section of Nottingham Rd. that did not receive a recent overlay. Nottingham Rd., due to concern of truck traffic from the Mountain Star Construction, was overlaid from Pizza Hut to the intersection of Medcalf Rd., then up Medcalf Rd. through Block 5. The Towns concern is that this construction will adversely impact this section of the road. As a condition, then, it will be asked for a 2 inch overlay of asphalt from the end of the cald-a-sac to Medcalf road. Either the work be done or funds be placed in an account that the town has control of so that the work be done. Second condition wih be important in making the parking numbers work, is that the mini storage in the basement that was granted a parking variance, should remain as mini storage or parking only. The site plan does indicate that some construction will need to take place off the site and in a drainage ditch. This is not appropriate. All construction should remain on the site. This has been added as a condition. The last condition is basically some "housekeeping." This site was originally three lots. The existing building utilizes a portion of two of these lots. One of these lot lines was vacated to allow that building to be constructed. An additional lot line will need to be vacated to build Phase H. This should go through the Lot Line Vacation process prior to issuance of the building permit. With this Rick recommends approval of tht project essentially as it was proposed in 1986, with the change in the parking ramp. Les Shapiro stepped up and introduced himself and stated that he did not have anything to add. John asked what Les' feelings were on the four conditions. Les had no problem with them. He, however, did wish to address the building area that was off site. Rick said that Norm had a concern that staging construction in the particular area that was off-site might block the drainage channel. Le; said that if there were a way to work this out he would appreciate it. He recognized that they were going to be tight in storing. Since everything was concrete there will be a tremendous amount of forms that will be brought in. There really is no place to put the forms or to store the top soil. Les called Oscar Chang who is the owner of this property (although the Town owns part of the area too) and he did not have a problem with it. Les said that they would revegitate and clean up the mess. He said that he only needed the area through the framing process. John asked if the Town owns the property or Mr. Chang. Rick said he thought it was the Towns' F PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 18 Lot 27/28, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Mountain Center, Phase II. Final Desien Review (cont.) Norm said he 'oes not remember who owns it, but the major concern from the Towns standpoint is the drainage --keeping it open. If a heavy thunderstorm would come through, the back-up in there will bring in mud and could cause problems, even for the construction site. Buz asked if a culvert could be installed temporarily. Norm said that a rulvert would probably not work. A flash flood would bring a pile of mud and debris as much as water. Jack Hunn asked if the drainage area be bridged temporarily. Norm said that there may be some way of bridging it. The biggest concern still will be that it remain unobstructed. Les said that he appreciated these concerns. It would be a benefit if they really looked at reshaping the drainage channel so that it works into the drainage swell better. Les had planned on doing this too. Les didn't know what else to add, but if a proposition is determined when he talks to the excavator about it, he would come back to the Board. Rick said it really doesn't need to be a Planning Commission issue. Les and Norm could work something out through the building permit process. John did want to suggest at this point a few conditions he had thought of. When Les paints, will he try to match the same color? Les said yes. John asked if he would be open to coming back and presenting a new color for the building that would blend more with the background hillside. More in earth tones rather than the pink. To match the pink is going to be a difficult process. It will become double in size so John feels that the color could be improved upon. The other condition John wanted to suggest was regarding the signage. It is very obtrusive, particularly at night. Would there be a way to make the signs of less intensity at night and/or left completely off at night. Les commented regarding the color. The dusty rose color that was chosen was because they thought it was a good Colorado color that did blend in well. Over the course of the years the building has gained an identification as being the pink building. Les feels that it is a handsome looking building, and has something to say that's different from all of the other industrial buildings. It is a very high quality building, not a steel building. With the split -face block Les feels the color is appropriate. As far as matching the two sides Les has no problem because they were going to repaint the fust building anyway. No matter what is done there will be no match because of the aging process of the paint on the building. Les is content with the color but would take suggestions. Regarding the signage, Les happens to agree with John. Some of the background on the signs have a creamy color and they look just fine. The backgrounds were never thought of for the tenants Sign Program. All that was stipulated was the size. Some of the signs that are clear translucent white. These are the ones that pop out at night. Les would like to eventually tone them all down., but, he would hate to go back to the tenants and tell them to repaint their signs. Les said that it is not the intensity of the lighting itself. It is just the backgrounds. The commercial area in the town has a lot of these type of bright signs, but because it is an area that is all lit up, these bright signs are less significant to the peoples eyes. Once people drive away from the town area and then see the Mountain Center lights it becomes over -bright. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 19 Lot 27/28, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Mountain Center, Phase II. Final Design Review (cont.) John opened discussion up on all of the points. There also needs to be a decision on Jerry's Special Review Use. Buzz began by stating that he has camped up on the mountain and looked down and the Mountain Center is the first one to be seen immediately. Buz was the only member of the Board when the building was first approved in 1986. Because the signs are big and the background a bright white, Buz prepossess that only the letters be lit, rather than the entire sign. He would also like to see the wattage taken down. Buz also agreed with John about the color of the building. The only other comment was that if Jerry keeps his autos down inside of the basement, Buzz has no problem with Jerry being there. Jack Hunn made the comment that the ramp that is shown on the plan is greater in width at the street and less at the building. The elevation of the same condition where one would enter the lowest level appears to be the width of the street. Which of the two conditions is correct? There seemed to be some confusion so Jack stepped down from his desk and pointed his comments out on the plans along the wall. Because they were very hard of hearing Charlette said they needed to speak very loud if they were going to speek away from the mic. They came back to the mic and Michael Sanner introduced himself as one helping Les with the project. He began flipping through his set of plans. Finally he found the sheet and said that where the plan starts, which is about 27 feet out from the building, is where the ramp is just starting to go down . At the width of 20 feet. This width does continue all the way down. It doesn't ramp from the street to the garage door. It starts about halfway the distance between the two before it actually starts the break down. Rick asked if one could come into the parking lot and go through the parking lot. Michael said yes, although the details on this are not up on the wall. More flipping through pages made it difficult to hear the conversation. I was able to determine that the ramp does go down to the street. Rhoda commented that one could not go into the parking lot from the ramp. They corrected her and said that she is looking at the grade of that parking lot. Rhoda then understood the drawing. One could turn into the parking lot from the ramp. The planner is just short of where the break occurs in terms of the land. Jack Hunn's concern was that in "this elevation we have got the width of two garage doors, plus some windows, so that it appears to be this width that is not available for parking on this existing level." Yet on the site plan it is shown as narrower somehow. Michael interrupted saying that there was a planner there that in the second phase will be turned into a landing area for the staircase Jack asked if it was consistent with parking calculations. The answer was yes. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINI -TES July 20,1993 Page 20 Lot 27/28, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Mountain Center, Phase II Final Design Review cont. John asked where the trench drain exited into. Les said that it drained into the main system. Then John asked if the ramp was deeded. Les said it was not, the trench drain is. Jack asked what the side walls around the ramp be finished with. Les said it will be the same face block that the building is made of Jack then asked how the customer will park their car on a short term basis to initiate service with Jerry's Automotive downstairs. Les said that they would come off the ramp and there will be a new office shown. This way Jerry will have visibility of who is coming. Jack then said that in winter conditions the door will be closed to preserve heat, and the customer will drive down, get out of their car and to go through the door will have to say ,r -,n here, and open the door." Les said there will be a glass front office right by the ramp. There will be an electric operator to open the door in the office. Patti was not quite clear as to how many spaces Jerry had, 26 or what. Rick clarified that the parking code required 26 spaces for his use. Which does not include what is in his garage for his work space. Now, for Phase I the spaces are short. There will be some excess parking after Phase II, counting for Jerry's demand for 25 spaces that is paying, not 26. There was a Blanket Special Use Review permit that allowed different uses for the building as long as there was parking. Rhoda commented that she had seen the expression on Jerry's face when Buz said that everyone for Jerry's will be parking underground. He did not look like he was in total consort with the idea. Rhoda wanted to hear what Jerry saw as a scenario for cars coming to be worked on at his place. Jerry said that he did seem a little lost about the whole issue. Jerry came up and introduced himself and said as far as parking underground, he had not heard anything about it. Les had mentioned to him about there being 10 to 12 spots for Jerry out front. He had not heard the requirements for 25. In their conversation Jerry said that Les mentioned that Jerry could have the overflow parking area up in the corner, later on. Rhoda asked how many cars he could put in his garage at one time. Jerry answered 45 if he packed the entire thing. Workable wise, Jerry said that he could put in 25 to 30. Then Rhoda asked how much space he actually needed. Inside, Jerry said that he has recently had 25 to 30 cars in his garage, they sit in there almost all the time. It is almost always full in the garage. Outside he keeps, during the night hours, 15 or so, but during the day he can have up to 25 vehicles. Rhoda said that Les mentioned that Jerry would be changing the way he conducted business. Rather than be on a drive-in basis, it would be by appointment. Jerry said yes, he is trying to get rid of the 'dead -heads' sitting out in the parking lot. This happens a lot around automotive repair shops. Jerry said that so far the appointment basis of business has worked well. Rhoda then asked Les if he planned on designating parking spots for Jerry so the cars would not be spread throughout the lot. Les said that he would allocate 8 to 10 parking spots for Jerry's, -to more than that. Jerry will have to work on a more appointment basis like he is trying for now. When it comes lease time and it doesn't work Les will not review the lease. It will have to work this way. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 21 Lot 27/28. Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Mountain Center. Phase II Final Design Review cont. John asked when Jerry's lease comes up again for renewal. Les answered another year and half. Les wished to clarify that he was not being hard about this and is not trying to put Jerry out of business. If he could find another place and build the suit he feels it will be the best of all worlds eventually. Jack Hunn then verified with Rick that there were 25 to 26 spaces allocated for Jerry's. Rick said in the parking summary that is correct. Les said that personally for him it does not work, even though that does not work for Rick's summary. Les said that up until a week ago Jerry had a mechanic that was dealing with cars. He had a lot of cars stored there. It has made a big difference now in the number of cars since the mechanic left. Jerry said yes. Buzz asked about the space in the mini storage area downstairs; "how big are the bays across." The answer was 28 feet. This provides room for 3 cars. If it is 28 x 28 then 6 cars could fit in there if one wanted to store vehicles. It would be almost straight on after a vehicle comes off the ramp. They pulled out *he plans. And Les said that it could be a good possibility, because in the report to the staff that part of their plan was if the parking did not meet their own criteria, that Jerry could use storage area. This would allow Jerry to have more parking if needed. Jerry felt, however, that people would drive right down and block an entry way for him to use the area. Buzz said thought that if Jerry needed to park a car and he did not want to take it upstairs, he could use the storage area. Jerry liked the idea. Les had no problem with this either. Jack asked where a new customer that doesn't know the system might find Jerry's Auto. Les said that this has already been addressed by the new office that is at the head of the ramp in which directions can be obtained or the person punches a button to enter downstairs. There were a few jokes that passed then Jack went on to say he felt that the color of the building should be reconsidered and that something needed to be done about the sign program. Jack would like to see some further study as to what can be done. Les said he would be happy to. Les did feel though that they stand out more because they are in a less lit up area. Jack stated that because of these conditions that are different than in town, the problem needed to be addressed. Les would like for the people to use their own creativity, but feels that something could be worked out for the background being similar. Jack felt that fewer numbers of bulbs or watts might also do the trick. Or a filter over the bulbs may also work. Patti also stressed the less light in the signs so they would work will with the new signs. She did not have a problem with the paint as long as they matched. Henry Vest said that lie liked the color, but he could see it being a lighter shade, or making it two toned. Les did mention that it is already two -toned with the parapets and fascia. Henry also wanted to know what the grade into Jerry s on the ramp. He thought it might be an ice scatting rink going down it in the winter. The grade is 7.4% grade, as Les answered, and it is straight on south facing. PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 22 Lot 27/28, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Mountain Center Phase IL Final Design Review cont. Rhoda asked if Jerry understood what was expected of him regarding the parking situation. Jerry said "Not really." Rhoda said 10 outside parking spaces and if this is not enough they will use interior bays to make up these parking spaces. Les said that this was correct. As Les was looking for some information to show what else could be done for Jerry Rick stepped in and explained the requirements for the parking spaces. Warehouse space requires 1 parking space for every 800 square feet. Les provided with a Tenant list and their square footage. When Rick went through the list he determined the number of parking space for the square footage. Office space requires 3 parking spaces for every 1000 sque.re feet of office space. It doesn't matter what Les assigns to them in his lease. As long as Rick sees that there is enough over all parking to meet the requirements for the space. Jerry has 8000 square feet. As a personal service establishment he is allotted 3 parking spaces per every 1000 square feet. This works out to be 24 1/2 spaces. There are no halves so he requires 25 parking spaces. Restaurants need 1 space for every 60 sq. ft.. 64 spaces are required in Phase I, 57 are available. As Phase JI comes on, there will be excess parking, 104 spaces are required and 115 are available. There is a tenant mix issue going on for uses. Rhoda then said it can't meet requirements when Jerry and maybe others are not allowed a certain number of spaces. Rick said we don't review leases between tenants and land owners. It's none of our business. Les feels that by keeping the number of spaces to a small number, Jerry will be forced to make business by appointments, and won't have dead cars laying around all the time. Jack said that Les is making a performance standard that he is comfortable with. If the standard is maintained, the Special Review Use works for the staff, even though it may not work for the tenant. Rhoda said that she liked the color. John wished to resolve the Special Review Use and would like to retain any further discussion or motions to continue the Special Review Use. Jack wanted to know if time frames can be placed on Special Review Uses. Rick said that it was not unusual. Jack then made a motion to continue the Special Review Use for Jerry's Automotive on Lot 27/28, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek with the condition that exterior parking be limited to 10 spaces and that 1 year after Phase II is occupied that a review take place of the Special Review Use. Buz Reynold 2nd the motion. Sue wanted to know if it was our place to put the limitation of 10 spaces. Rick said that it has been done before. And Jack said that this was the proposal that has been made to the staff. The vote took place with an unanimous approval PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 23 Lot 27/28, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Mountain Center Phase II Final Design Review cont. Further discussion on the Final Review was finished up by Sue Railton. She did not particularly like the color of the building, but she would like to see more contrast in the colors on the building. If the pinkie tone is to remain, she feels that the gray/blue should be either lighter or darker to make a bit more contrast. The signs are very uninteresting in shape, and the cream color makes them look as though the sun has turned them that color because they have been up for years, when they really haven't. For Phase II she would like to see the sign background match a color on the building. Then have the lighter lettering come through. John suggest that maybe the staff could give Les an approval that maybe he could come back on the color. Henry Vest had the same comment as Sue. John's comment was that he would like to see a new color. Patti liked the color, but wanted the signs changed. Jack moved to grant Final Design Approval to Mountain Center, Phase II with the following conditions: Staff recommendations 1, 2, and 4, and that this approval excludes final colors so that the applicant come back to the Board, and finally that this approval excludes a continuation of the same sign program so the applicant needs to reconsider opportunities for various ways to make a better sign program and come to the board at a later date with it. Patti Dixon 2nd the motion. Les wanted clarification on the off-site storage request. Can he just get with Norm? The answer was yes. The vote then took place with unanimous approval. Buz Reynolds moved that all approve resolutions 93-7, 93-8. Rick said that these are resolutions that back up the height and parking variances that were granted at the last meeting. Jack Hunn 2nd the motion. The resolutions passed with a unanimous vote. Jack moved that all approve the minutes of July 6, 1993 as submitted. Henry Vest 2nd the motion. All approved the minutes in a unanimous vote. iN PANNING AND ZONING COAIMISSION MEETING MINUTES July 20,1993 Page 24 Other business Other business was brought up by Charlette Pascuzzi. She said that Mike Bennett casted today wanting to know what time to be at the meeting. He was very unhappy that he was not on the agenda, but Charlette had not received anything from. He had asked that he could present the colors. He is now painting the building, the Beaver Creek West; the one that wanted the black railings. Rick said that the staff tabled the black railings because Eric Hill did not know what was going to happen. He did not have the information he needed. Apparently, from Charlettes' conversation with Mike the building is going to be painted the exact same color. The railings are proposed to be black, but, Charlette said, some of the staff was not happy with this color. There is not any other black on the building, Rick said. Mike said to Charlette that he would paint the railings any color the staff wants. Rick said that there is no automatic placement on the agenda, he needed to come back with information if he wanted to be on it. Rick said that this does not require any action from the staff. Staff does need to follow-up, John said, to see what Mike does want to do with the railings. Jack had a few quick items of business. Jack wanted to know what the fence material would be as a guard rail issue on top of it, for the approved area in Wildwood. Norm said that the fence that was there was chain-link. This type of fence would be a more modern. Rick said that this issue is needing to come back to staff, because a split rail fence was also talked about. Norm talked more about the proposal wanting to have some kind of backing behind the fence, even though the Town engineer said it would not be acceptable according to safety standards and to liability. More discussion included the level this fence would be sitting at, but because most of it was informal conversation it was hard to make out what was being said. Buz did want to know if the sign was going to be placed up. Norm said that the Metro District will be making the space available if someone does want to put a sign on it. Rick said that the sign was a suggestion. It is a Town of Avon project, and there is a distinction between the Town and the Metro District, which is the water provider. Avon Metro had no interest in a big sign that said "Welcome to Wildridge." Rick said that if they could find someone else to pay for it, this area would be a great location for it. Norm said that if they put on the sign, "Avon Metro District" with a pump station or something, they might consider being part of it. Jack Hurn wanted to mention that Block 1, Lot 29 which is under construction has done quite a bit of platforming, and they have finally graded a back yard. John Orfits is the owner. Jack said that the reason why he got so concerned about that tot was the grading plan did not match the intention we heard tonight. When you have dirt, you don't want to haul it away so you make it work, and some of the grades become very radical. He would just ask, in the course of doing inspections, that staff take a look at the final grading solution of Lot 29, Block 1 of Wildridge. Rhoda asked if there were any inspections going on for the houses that were built last year of people finishing their landscaping. Rick said that this probably could not be kept up with. Winter will hit before we know it, Rhoda said, and if it is not going to get done this year it won't gl:t done. There are 4 or 5 houses up there that are not finished. Rick agreed, then said that he apologi2 ed for the disorganization. The Board, however, all said that the felt it went quit smooth. 62 PANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEE TING MINM ES July 20,1993 we Page 25 Buz motioned to adjourn, and Jack 2nd the motion. ri® The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Y� " Vari Reichardt Assistant Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary Commission Approval J. Perkins S. Railton Z R. Schnei erma A. Reynolds P. Dixon, H. Vest r i Date g 3 3