Loading...
PZC Minutes 051893RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on May 18, 1993,at 7:30 PM in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Municipal building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Perkins. Members Present: John Perkins, Henry Vest, Sue Railton, Jack Hunn, Rhoda Schneiderman, Buz Reynolds Staff Present: Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development Tom Allender, Town Planner Chairman Perkins stated that all members were present except for Commissioner Reynolds and Commissioner Dixon. Commissioner Reynolds arrived later. Lot 4. Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision Farr Single Family Residence Final Design Review Tom Allender stated that Art Farr is proposing a single family home on Lot 4, Block 3, Wildridge. The Commission saw this application at conceptual and at final where it was tabled. At that time there was some concern that the windows on one elevation did not make sense and the two small dormers on the front of the building really did not do what the Planning Commission was looking for as far as creating some interest. The Commission felt that the dormers were too small. At the last meeting it was suggested that instead of having two dormers, having one dormer and then a gabled entry cover and that is what the applicant has done. Allender stated he thinks that the project meets all the criteria and Staff recommends approval with two conditions. One being that the gas and electric meters be attached to the building and the other being that there be a vertical element either at the exterior of the gable or at the eave line to give it more of a finished look instead of using the shingles as shown. The applicant had nothing else to add. Rhoda Schneiderman stated she thought it looked good. She asked Allender to point out where he meant about making the change with the shingles. Allender did so. Discussion followed on the landscaping which the applicant has added between the parking area and the street. The applicant has also added a drip irrigation system. r PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 Page 2 of 16 Chairman Perkins commended the applicant for working with the Commission they way he has. He stated that he felt that this was a much better project. Hunn asked about the 12 foot driveway. Allender stated that it would have to be wider at the street, but the rest can be 12 feet. Discussion followed on the entry dormer. Sue Railton questioned the small windows under the small dormer. The applicant stated that that is the way the interior works. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to grant final design review approval for Lot 4, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, with the following conditions: 1. The electric and gas meters be placed on the building. 2. That the driveway be widened at the street. 3. That a vertical wall at the entry gable be built and be sided with T & G siding. Sue Railton seconded. After discussion of the width of the driveway at the street, the condition of widening the drive at the street was deleted. Discussion followed on the color of the off white stucco. The applicant stated that this stucco is actually called aspen white and has a tannish tint to it. The motion was called and carried unanimously. Lot 98, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Sterling Duplex Fipal Design Review Tom Allender stated that the Sterlings are requesting a final design review on Lot 98, Block 1. The lot is located on the north side of Old Trail Road and is approximately .43 acres in size and slopes down to the south. At the conceptual review the Commission was concerned with the treatment of the decks and walking under the decks to the entry way and the shed roofs over the entry ways. The applicant has incorporated an arch and added larger columns on the decks and has moved the deck from the unit closest to the street around to the front side of the house as opposed to the street side. The house did PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 3 of 16 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 98, block 1. Wildridge Subdivision, Sterling Duplex. Final Design Review (Cont) not get moved '-)ack on the lot, due to the deck encroachment into the setback. The applicant moved the deck to the side instead. With those changes the structure is within all Town height, lot coverage and setback restrictions. The exterior is finished in Omega Chenille stucco, window trim will be 2 x 10 and 2 x 6 rough sawn cedar, door trim will be 2 x 6 rough sawn cedar, the fascia will be 2 x 10 rough sawn, all with a cedar tone stain, the roof form is a gable with dormers utilized and covered with a Heritage Two asphalt shingle in a rustic redwood. The landscape plan appears adequate and a drip irrigation system will be utilized. Staff recommends approval with the condition that the electric and gas meters be attached to the building. The applicant stated that they had added some detail to the other side in response to the comments made by the Commission. Since the applicant was not near a microphone it is difficult to understand just what additions were made. Jack Hunn asked about the driveway grade. The applicant replied it is about 8 1/2 to 9% and will be concrete. Discussion followed on the matter of any landscaping around the units. The applicant stated that there is a small courtyard between the two units. Hunn asked Staff if they feel that the level of documentation was enough for final approval. Allender asked what he means about documentation. Hunn stated that when he reads the regulations on what is to be submitted, it seems that this is a schematic of that. This is the tool with which you get to enforce this approval. Henry Vest stated that he likes it bu: the rendering is kind of hard to read. He can understand where Jack is coming from. Perkins asked where the meters will ae. The applicant stated that they will be where they can be read, but will be enclosed on the building. Discussion followed on the colors. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she would like to see the landscaping beefed up a little bit, especially around the base of the building, considering it is all stucco and there is no relief. Buz Reynolds did not like the way the corners were. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to grant approval for Lot 98, Block 1, final design review, with the following conditions: PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 4 of 16 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 98, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision Sterling Duplex, Final Design Review. (cont) I. All meters being placed on the building and be covered. 2. Additional landscaping be brought in to mitigate the unbroken line of stucco around the building. Sue Railton seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Lot 71, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Thompson Single Family Residence, Final Design Review Tom Allender stated that at conceptual design review of this project the Commission was concerned about the lack of turnaround in the driveway, the roof form above the main entrance, the grading plan that needed some work, and the size and the arrangement of the windows the southern elevation. The applicant has addressed all these issues, however, they should be aware that the the parking shown in the road maintenance easement will have to be approved by the Avon Public Works Department and also the will probably have to live with the fact that if they put their parking there, it will be of questionable use with a winter like this last one, because the Town will be plowing snow into it. The landscape plan leaves the majority of the lot natural, but what is planned appears adequate. A drip irrigation system is proposed. The retaining wall will be constructed from 2 to 3 foot boulders. Staff would recommend approval with the condition that the gas and electric meters be attached to the house and that the applicant provide a landscape plan with a plants list and sizes on it. Discussion followed on the sizes of the plant material. The applicant stated that the junipers are 5 gallon sizes, the aspens are 2-1/2 inch caliper and the ponderosa pines are 7 feet. Allender stated that the exterior color finishes are: the siding is 1 x 8 channel rustic in a cedar tone finish, windows will be aluminum wood clad with a bronze finish, and the shingles are a Heritage Two asphalt composition shingle in a shadow gray. (Several people were talking among themselves at this time and it is difficult to actually transcribe what Mr. Allender was saying). Allender stated that the other change made is that the entry way over the garage door has been closed in. Henry Vest asked about the three foot retaining wall off the driveway, because it is right up close to the road. Sterling stated that this is pretty spelled out by the topo survey. a W PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 5 of 16 01 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Rhoda Schneiderman asked if the color rendering remotely resembles reality? The applicant stated it did. Schneiderman asked for samples of the colors. Vest asked how wide the drive was? The applicant stated that it is 15 feet in the main driving area and it is 30 foot wide at the turnaround up by the garage and is 22-1/2 feet at the street. Further discussion followed on the retaining wall and it's location. The applicant stated that there was also a rock retaining wall on the north elevation. John Perkins stated that the landscape plan looks sparse. The applicant stated that there are 9 aspen, 3 ponderosa,and 2 junipers. (the balance of the landscaping is not discernible as whoever was speaking is not near a microphone.) Discussion followed on the roof form change, which was done due to comments made at conceptual review. The also got rid of the exterior stairs. Reynolds asked if all the areas going down hill would be reseeded and if there would be a sprinkler system? The applicant replied yes. Hunn stated that he is still concerned with the maneuvering space and he thinks that in reality in the winter it will become snow storage space and the vehicles will be forced to back out of the drive into the street. He stated that he cannot understand how this driveway could be installed without any retaining walls and still achieve a 2 to 1 regrade. The driveway pitches at varying degrees all the way to the garage door and you are going to rely on the trench drain to not fail and not get clogged with sediment and to keep water from getting into this house. Hunn stated that he is very uncomfortable with the whole driveway strategy. In interpreting the site plan and trying to match it up to the base line that you have drawn on your elevations, it appears that on the southwest corner where there is a deck, the grade on your site plan is about 3 feet lower than you are showing on your elevation. Yet you have a patio door down there with the apparent attempt to come out to some kind of usable space, so there again it seems like a retaining wall is necessary to grade a flat enough area to just get out of the building. Architecturally some improvements have been made. Turning that roof down helps it architecturally, but your now shedding water over the entry door. That might be handled with a gutter. Hunn stated that he is still confused as to why the windows are so sporadically placed on the big view side of the house. The applicant stated that they take up the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 Page 6 of 16 whole living room. The one tall trapezoid is in the stairwell. The space in between the two large windows is the fireplace. Hunn stated that he finds that two of the elevations are pretty pleasing in their form. Two of them, the roof stair stepping up and then back down on the east elevation is a little bit busy. The degree of each step is pretty radical. Hunn stated that he feels that the landscape plan is weak. He feels that. 2 junipers is not enough. He suggested clustering the trees together and add more shrubbery, particularly around the entry area. Hunn asked Staff if the proposed overflow parking or maneuvering space is allowed in the setback. Allender stated that this house received a variance and at that meeting this was discussed and it is his understanding that this was included in the variance. He stated that he has talked with Public Works about it and their comment was that it was fine with them, but that they did not want to hear any complaints from the owners when it is full of snow from the road. The applicant stated he felt that the turnaround would be ample, even with snow storage. He stated he understands the concerns of the committee about backing out on such a treacherous lot, but he feels they are imposing some conditions on the owners by making them pave a giant turnaround on such a small lot, that it is economically not feasible. without getting the kind of retaining walls at Myers, which he feels is unsightly. Further discussion followed. Reynolds asked if there was anyway of taking the radius as shown now and straighten it out a bit so the snow could be pushed a different way. The applicant stated they could. Railton stated that she thinks that the plantings could be grouped a little better also. Grouping the trees on the west side of the drive would be better. Also, some good ground cover will be needed on the bank as it will be disturbed for quite some distance and on the southwest corner too. She stated that she still finds those windows on the view elevation a bit disturbing. They are sort of not built in that convincing manner. He would rather see the two big ones closer together and you have one lining up underneath the other ones neither here nor there. That band that comes down that drops looks a little bit strange. She thinks the deck fits on the corner nicely though. She asked if the mullions on the big windows line up with anything? The applicant stated that they just line up with each other. Railton stated that they look a little out of sync. Perkins stated that he had the same comments about the driveway. Tt is a concern to him. The window fenestration needs some more work. He does not like that the applicant did not bring samples of the wood colors. He stated that he will not support a project unless he sees samples of all materials. Also, the landscape is inadequate. PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 7 of 16 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Henry Vest asked about the two windows on the south elevation in the stucco portion and why they can't line up with the others. The applicant stated that the elevation in question was the west elevation. He stated that the thinks that the Commission's concern with centering windows is a valid concern, but he thinks artistically there are ways to balance an elevation by off setting windows, rather than centering windows. He feels that this project is proportionally well balanced the way the windows are lined up. Vest stated that he thinks the applicant should add more shrubs in the area where the two junipers are shown. Also, he feels that some of the trees need to be clustered. He stated that he likes the way that the applicant has changed it. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she echoes John Perkins statements and she still finds the elevations very awkward. Reynolds stated he understands the difficulty of the driveway, but he feels it is a doable :hing. He asked the applicant if it would be possible to pave some of that area so that it is actually a place that could be plowed easily along the roadside front of the house? He thinks this would elevate some of the concerns of the other Commission members. Buz Reynolds moved to grant final desigr approval to Lot 71, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, with the following conditions: 1. The retaining wall be straightened out so that the snow storage can be gained on the lower side of the parking area. 2. The landscaping be grouped and brought back to Staff and additional two trees be added. 3. The gas and electric meters be attached to the building. Henry Vest seconded. The motion was called and there was a tie vote with Reynolds, Vest, and Railton voting for approval and Schneiderman, Perkins and Hunn voting against the motion. A tie vote constitutes a denial. Chairman Perkins stated that he would encourage the applicant to address the concerns of the three that voted against the project. Tom Allender stated that Sam Sterling is representing the Warnkes and PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 Page 8 of 16 Lot.34 Block 1 Wildridge Subdivisions Warnke Single Family Residence, Conceptual Design Review, (cont) is requesting conceptual review of a single family residence. The lot is located at the end of Long Spur. Its access is through a 30 foot easement on Lot 33. Lot 34 is approximately .45 acres and the lot slopes down to the north at about 19%. It is zoned for a duplex. The structure is one story with a walkout basement and has approximately 2000 square feet of habi-table space. The structure, as proposed, is within all Town height, lot coverage, and setback restrictions. The proposed exterior is finished in stucco. The color is Omega Chenille. Windows will be aluminum with bronze finish. The trim will be 2 x 6 and 2 x 8 rough sawn cedar with a cedar tone finish. Fascia will be 2 x 10 rough sawn cedar with a cedar tone stain. The roof form is an offset gable, finished with Heritage Two asphalt composition shingles in rustic redwood. The landscape plan leaves the majority of the lot natural, what is planted appears adequate. The grading play, plan appears to be adequate. The applicant indicates irrigation by sprinkler and exterior lighting has not been discussed. The Commission was at the board where the plans were put up discussing various items of the plans. However, there were several people discussing different aspects of the plans at the same time, therefore, no sense can be made of any of the discussions. Another problem with this concept is that no one identifies what particular elevation, etc., they are discussing. Buz Reynolds stated that he still likes breaking up stucco buildings with some kind of detail, even if is raised detail in stucco. Jack Hunn stated that he thinks it is a nice lot. He asked if the driveway is paved? The applicant replied that it was. Hunn stated that he was a little concerned with the hip roof over the garage door shedding water onto the driveway and you have one other elevation where you have a gable end and as this is conceptual he would suggest that the applicant consider introducing a gable end over the garage. The response from the applicant is not clear, but it sounds as if he did not agree. Hunn stated that if he was going to live in the house he would rather have snow shedding away from the garage door. Hunn agreed with Reynolds that the all stucco building being not very interesting, however, all his comments are not clear because Rhoda Schneiderman is talking to someone at the same time. Hunn did say that this building could be made a little more interesting with a second material added to it. Sue Railton stated that making the posts and `.he supporting beams out of good size lumber would become quite a feature to the house. She h ..N PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 Page 9 of 16 Lot 34, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivi_.ion. Warnke Single Family Residence. Conceptual Design Review. (cont) would even like to see that deck become bigger and that would relieve the whole thing of the vast amount of stucco. John Perkins stated he would like to see a landscape plan, material grouping, and he would like to see more material, and he would like to see a more professional presentation. He feels that the window fenestrations could be improved upon. He wants to see all color samples. He agrees with Railton about the detailing on the framing of the porch area and deck. He feels the project needs some wood siding in some application, just to break up that large expanse of stucco. Henry Vest stated that he likes the roof form. He stated that Rhoda has the same roof form and she implied that she had no problems. Vest stated that he could see maybe putting a gutter along the top there. He also felt that some interest should be added to the stucco, maybe a little more landscaping detail around the base. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she generally thinks that it is a pleasing design. She also thinks that the landscaping needs to be beefed up with maybe some shrubs around the base of the building. She stated that she personally likes stucco. She agreed with Railton about beefing up those beams with vertica'. beams that hold up that covered walkway, maybe with some cross bracing. She asked what the garage door would be made out of. The applicant stated it would be wood. She asked if it would be stained or painted. The applicant stated it would be painted the same as the trim. She stated that she would like to see a color rendering at final design review. Chairman Perkins reviewed the Commission comments. BlockLot 28, . _•- Subdivision,Orcutt Duplex.Conceptual Desian Review Tom Allender stated that John Orcutt, owner and designer, has request conceptual design review. This lot is located on the east side of. Long Spur and is approximately .37 acres in size and slopes southeast at about 10%. It is zoned for a duplex. The applicant previously received a conceptual review on this lot with a totally different design. The proposed duplex is a primary/secondary design with a 2400 square foot primary unit and a 1100 square foot secondary unit to be used as a rental apartment. The structure has two levels with the garage and the main living level and the apartment in the lower level. The structure, as proposed, is within the Town tot coverage, height, and setback restrictions. The exterior of the building will PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 10 of 16 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 28, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision Orcutt Duplex Conceptual Design Review, (cont) be finished in a lap siding, painted light tan. The fascia will be a 1 x 8 rough cut with a 1 x 4 shadow line. The *•indow and door trim will 1 x 4 rough cut, all finished in green. ;_.ie soffits will be plywood painted tan. Asphalt shingles in a dark tan are proposed. The weight has not been indicated. The grading plan submitted indicates all grades are within Town guidelines. Landscaping appears to be adequate and includes a drip irrigation system. As this is conceptual, no formal staff recommendation will be provided. The applicant stated that he took the Commission's suggestion that he look at some of the other houses built in the area. He feels that he has come up with a design that directly reflects the architectural design of two houses in the immediate area and eight other houses in the subdivision. It is not a very tall building and it should fit into the hill. The cedar siding was influenced by other houses in the area. The applicant described all the changes he has made, including moving the driveway, as suggested by the Commission. He provided pictures of a similar house. Discussion followed on the lack of windows in some of the areas. Several people were talking at the same time and some of the discussion is not clear. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she finds the house a little uninteresting. She felt that the 64 foot unbroken roof line is too much. Visually, larger posts would help. Schneiderman stated that at final she needs more detailed plans. Henry Vest asked if there would be a professionally drawn set of plans? The applicant stated that they are in the works, but he did not know if they would be done in time. Vest recommended that they be presented at final. He stated that the deck posts should be 6 x 6 for appearance. He stated that the applicant could possibly change the massive siding, and on the face turn it to stucco with a belly band, He stated that he liked the trellis on the side of the garage and he likes the cross beams over the garage on the gable side. Sue Railton stated that she thinks that this plan is a bit too basic. She thinks that the windows are very uninteresting. When you have a very plain building you need very interesting window massings. Jack Hunn stated he thinks he has done a much better site strategy. The new access is a much more reasonable solution. He is concerned about the entrances being so hidden. There are also some roof forms shedding to the entrance. He asked if the overflow parking is dedicated to the apartment? The applicant stated it is for the apartment and guests. Hunn asked if the apartment would have any garage space. The applicant stated that it would. Hunn asked about PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 11 of 16 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 28, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision, Orcutt Duplex Conceptual Design Review. (cont) the stepped base material and what the lower material would be. The applicant stated it would be painted concrete. Hurn stated he would be uncomfortable with that as a finish solution, because there is quite a bit showing. He suggested a stucco finish. He stated that the earlier suggestion of two materials and a stucco base would work. He thinks to take advantage of the views toward the south over the deck and the three sliders, if a dormer element were added it would add interest to break up the length of the uninterrupted wall mass. He would have trouble supporting this house unless it were given more interest. Chairman Perkins stated that his comments have all been made. He thinks that the biggest problem he has with it is the uninterrupted form and the lack of interest. Lot 86, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision, Perry Four plex, Conceptual Design Review. Tom Allender stated that Mark Donaldson is representing the applicant. The lot is on the left side of Draw Spur and is .62 acres. The lot slopes down to the west at 17%. It is zoned for a four-plex. The building is a modular design with a repetitive facade. It is two stories with the garages on the bottom. Each unit is 1500 square feet. The project meets all Town height, lot coverage, and setback restrictions. Exterior is 6 inch Woodsman lap siding. The windows are wood clad. Trim is 1 x 6 wood. Fascia is 2 x 4 on 2 x 8 cedar and soffits are plywood. The roof form is gable with a series of small dormers. Roofing material will be a 350# asphalt shingle. The landscaping appears adequate. Lighting has not been discussed. Mark Donaldson discussed the grading. He stated that they grouped the garages into two halves to aliow for only two spots of asphalt instead of four and they will have landscape areas in between. He stated that, regarding exterior lighting, they have on the second floor of each unit there is a recessed covered balcony off the master suite that will have recessed lighting and so will the entry areas over 'the garage entry. On the west side of the building there will be wall mounted lights that will be on the balconies and the patios down below. There will be no exterior pole mounted lights. Vest asked if they had considered turning the building to get the better view. Donaldson stated that that is the way that they really wanted it but the grades would not allow it. He went on to describe PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 12 of 16 W ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 86. Block 1. Wildridge Perry Four-plex Conceptual Design Review. (cont) what the problems were with this concept. He described where the trash structure would be and how it would be designed. Further discussion followed on the lighting. The Commission indicated that they would prefer that the lights not be on all the time. Vest felt that the roof line was too straight. Vest also asked what kind of irrigation system would be used. Donaldson stated that it would be underground or an automatic system. In response to the comment about the roof line, Donaldson stated that he is not one to try to create tricky roof lines. He stated that they have the differences in elevation and also have the masses offset. They have elected to create the interest in the roof lines with the dormers in a functional way around the entrance and balconies and help accentuate some of the trim and attic ventilation features. He stated that he is into simplified roofs. They don't leak or cause problems. They have tried to deal with this with overhangs, with offsetting the massing. They have overhangs on the front and back. They have protruding balconies, etc. They would like to retain the simplicity as they think they will find enough interesting in the color of the siding and trim and windows. They have some interesting window shapes. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that sne thinks these forms are too long to be that simple. It is too repetitive. Considerable discussion followed between Schneiderman and Donaldson regarding this matter. Sue Railton stated that she thinks this is a pleasing design. Her comment is that if that is what is on the design, all of those details, then that is what they will want to see. She stated that she did not want to see another Bristol Pines. Jack Hunn felt that there was an awful lot ui asphalt there. One way to mitigate that is with a very good landscape plan. He stated, architecturally, he appreciates the drawings. Hunn felt the other things that add interest mitigates the roof line. He stated that the west elevation seems to be a pretty blank facade. Donaldson stated that this is the back of the garages. One of the proposals that they will come back with is that in each of those four lower bedrooms they will exchange those casement windows for a walkout patio. The grade will be brought up a little bit higher and there will be a bit of concrete out there. Further discussion followed on the blank facade. The applicant stated that he would see what he can do with it. The fireplaces will be gas. Discussion followed on the colors presented. , PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 Page 13 of 16 Lot 86, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Perry Four-plex Conceptual Design Review, (cont) Reynolds azi-ed if the project could be brought closer to the road. Donaldson stated that the closer to the road they bring it the steeper the retaining between the two driveways gets and the taller the west elevation gets. Reynolds was also concerned with the roof line. He also felt that landscaping would be the key to the massive amount of asphalt. Reynolds suggested breaking up the blank facade in the back with some stucco and maybe a window in the middle. Chairman Perkins stated that he agrees with most of the comments. He stated that he wonders if there is not a way to do something different. It is basically a mirror image situation. He stated that there is a lot of interest, but it is repeated twice. Henry Vest stated that it is funny because just looking at this, if it had been somebody else bringing it in, he would probably said this is not going to work. He thinks that the best thing that the Perrys did was to hire a professional to present this. He thinks that Donaldson has dressed this up, but being on the design review board he has received more than a number of comments about that modular four-plex that is already up there down the street and personally he thinks that they went through the hoops with the Board a few times and he doesn't think it is that bad. This is a modular home, it is a mirror image, it is masonite siding, and he is amazed at the comments that have been made here by the Board. He thinks the applicant is in a tough situation here, because, personally, he finds he cannot approve the way this is presented and you have every thing done here. He does not find it interesting enough the way it is. He stated that he just wanted to make that clear at the conceptual standpoint. Donaldson stated he is not sure what he is trying to tell him. What direction is he giving. Vest stated that it is a mirror image, he does not like it being a modular four-plex. It has to be a lot more interesting. It is two trailers put together, single ridgeline. He stated that Donaldson has done the best he can to try and dress two trailers put together. Donaldson responded that they are not trailers. They are 2 x 6 walls, built with solid wood trusses, with floors and roofs. They have 7/16 OSD. The have as good quality construction as any project you will find built around here. They have copper plumbing, copper wiring, gas heat, solid wood clad windows, double glaze high altitude glass, GE appliances, any finish you want on the inside, legacy masonite doors, proper attic and roof ventilation, etc. These are not trailers and he does not appreciate them being referred to as modular or trailers. He is here to get this design approved on the merits of its appearance. He stated that if you look at other multi -family projects in Wildridge and around the Town, every single one of them is repetitive. He stated that he PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 14 of 16 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 86, block 1, Wildridge Subdivision Perry four-nlex Conceptual Dee.ign Review, (cont) thinks that they have done some attractive things with the manufactured housing. He stated that he will take comments as far as textures, colors, architectural appeal, but not as far as the type of construction. He stated he feels that they have done a very responsible job of proposin•I a site development plan and he would like for the Commission to summarize their comments so that they can come back with a proposal that they can get approve at the next meeting. Further discussion followed on the possibilities for roofing changes. Discussion also followed on the matter of manufactured homes being allowed. Donaldsun stated that he has made a list of the comments made and he stated that he doesn't see changing this project design dramatically. He does not see breaking it into four offsets He doesn't see adding stone or stucco, he doesn't see any dramatic changes. He does feel that the landscaping plan can be addressed more carefully. Hunn suggested, to help, is if they could exaggerate the vertical separation to a degree and perhaps the horizontal separation. One building is several feet higher than the other, that cou'.d be exaggerated. Donaldson stated that they might be able to get another foot out of it. They are trying to enter at the lowest part of the city street. Hunn stated that he has no problem with factory built vs. stick built, until it becomes the reason why the design can't be interesting. He stated that he does agree that this roof form is uninteresting, but he does not know if it would be a better product with a busier roof. Considerable discussion followed. In review, Chairman Perkins stated that the Board feels that this project needs a little more interest in it lineal nature and mirror image nature. As a conceptual design review, no formal action was taken. Lot 87, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision McNeil Single Family, Conceptual Design Review Tom Allender stated that neither the architect or 'he owner were present, therefore he does not serve , purpose to c,o through this item. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to table this application. Buz Reynolds seconded and the motion carried unanimously. PLANNING AND May 18, 1993 Page 15 of 16 ?01%N 10111. ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Other Business Chairman Perkins stated there are a couple items to be discussed. Lot 16, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision, Sue Railton stepped down as a voting member of the Commission. Tom Allender stated that this is the detached duplex that Tony Seibert was proposing. John Railton is representing Mr. Seibert. The structure has been redesigned somewhat. There is now a small party wall connecting the two structures towards the rear. This is an actual room that connects the two buildings. It seems to be a pretty good compromise for making it one structure. Allender pointed out the connection on the floor plans. Allender stated that Staff feels that with the addition of the small party wall connecting the rear of the structure, it now meets the Town's definition of a duplex. With this new design the architect has now lowered the building one foot. The grades and the driveway had to be changed slightly, but the height is now within the Town regulations also. With these changes, Staff recommends approval as submitted. Buz Reynolds moved to grant final design approval for Lot 16, Filing 1, Eaalebend Subdivision, as submitted. Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Sue Railton returned as a voting member of the Commission. Proposed Public Works Satellite Facility Rick Pylman stated that the Town has hired John Perkins to design a satellite public works facility. This is in conjunction with the Mountain Star development. John Perkins described where the facility would be located in Block 5 of Wildridge. He stated that they are going to pursue a subterranean solution to the project. The concept will be that it will be a non -building, and make it go away as much as they possibly can. The site slopes at about 6-1/2 to 7% grade. Due to the fact that Mr. Perkins did not seem to be near a microphone and with the considerable rattling of paper some of his comment are not clear. He seems to be describing how the building will be built. He stated that the plan of the building will be four bays. He is hoping that the landscaping can be done in such a way that as a car comes around here they will never even see into the site. Two bays would be for cinder storage and two for vehicles, and some storage for herbicides -A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES May 18, 1993 Page 16 of 16 Proposed Public Works Satellite Facility (cont) etc. Again some of his comments are not clear. He stated that he did not have elevations yet. He described how the walls would be cast in place. Considerable discussion followed on the parking for the drivers. Several people were talking at the same time, therefore, none of the discussions are clear. Rhoda Schneiderman asked how the cinders will be delivered. Perkins stated that they will be delivered by dump truck. Discussion followed on the lighting. With many people talking the discussions are not clear, however, they seem to be discussing the landscaping also. Perkins stated that he will return in two weeks for a final design review. The meeting was then adjourned. Respectf _% ittsubecl l Charlette Pascuzzi ✓D� Recording Secretary COMMISSION John Jack Patt Rhod Henry vest. Sue Railto. Buz Reynol,