PZC Minutes 040693RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6, 1993
The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on April 6, 1993, at 7:30
P.M.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
Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording
Secretary
Chairman Perkins stated all members were present except Henry Vest, Patti Dixon and Buz Reynolds.
Mr. Vest arrived at 7:32 P.M. and Mr. Reynolds at 7:36 P.M.
Lots 2/4, Sunroad Subdivision, Denny's Design Chance
Rick Pylman stated that the original Denny's building had a dividing wall between the two entry doors
that ran at a 45 degree angle away from the building to a post at the end of the overhung During
construction the owners of the building decided that that wall did not function well for ingress and
egress to the restaurant. They requested permission to put uo a simple post The Commission table
this matter and the model shows the proposed solution. It is a corner wall that is similar to the
treatment used on the other comers of the building. Pylman stated that he felt it was a good
solution.
Doug Dowd stated thw the intent was to make sure that all corners of the building would be simdw
Sue Railton moved to approve the design change as requested, for Wt 214, Sunroad Subdivision.
Denny's restaurant.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 2
Lot 2/4, Sunroad Subdivision. de='s Design Change, (cont)
Rhoda Schneiderman seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Lot 50. Block 4. Wildridge Subdivision Lundell Residence, Roof Material, Design Review
Rick Pylman stated that the Lundell residence received conceptual design review in August of 1992,
and final design approval in March of 1993. A condition of that approval was that the applicant
provide a sample of the roofing material. Pylman stated that the sample does meet the criteria set for
metal roofing.
Robert Lundell provided a sample of the material. Discussion followed on how the roofing would be
attached, and the sheen on the roof.
Sue Railton moved to grant final design approval to the roofing material for Lot 50, Block 4,
Wildridge Subdivision, as presented.
Henry Vest seconded. He suggested the motion be amended to reflect that the small amount of
roofing and the lot location has been considered. Sue Railton so amended her motion. Vest seconded
the amendment. The motion carried with Buz Reynolds and Jack Hunn voting nay
Lot 58, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision. Sindlinger Single Family Residence. Final Design Revd
Rick Pylman stated that Michael Baker, representing the Sindlingers, is requesting final design review
for a single family house. He stated that the Commission has looked at this house at the conceptual
level. It is a one story structure, with a walkout basement. It is about 3500 square feet. It is within
all height, lot coverage, setback requirements. Siding is predominantly a 1 x 6 wood siding in buth
horizontal and vertical applications the door and window trim is cedar, windows are wood clad, fascia
and soffits will also be done in cedar. Some sandstone will be used as an accent in the lower portions
of the house. It has a complex roof form. The one concern that the Staff has and that is with the
landscape plan and stated iintent that there is an area that is marked to be planted with evergreen and
drought tolerant trees.
Staff recommends approval, with the condition that the appli.:ant submit a new landscape plan o the
Commission for final design review
Michael Baker provided a model showing the roof firms He also stated that when he tal►ed with
Tom Allender h C had indicated that they wanted to keep the site as natural as poauhle
Rhoda Schneiderman asked if the front door overhang was new' Itaket stated it was added due to the
Commission's previous concerns Schneiderman had cometm with the vul%% ahedduyt
Vest stated that he likes the roof
r -N ,
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 3
Lot 58, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision. Sindlin eg r Single Family Residence Final Design Review.
cont
John Perkins stated that he still has the same concerns regarding the roof form. He doesn't think that
the applicant has addressed the problems regarding ice damming, etc.
Jack Hunn asked if the Staff has confirmed the driveway grade as being less than 10%? Pylman stated
he assumes that if Tom Allender would have mentioned it in the Staff Report if there was any problem.
Hunn stated that he feels the cricket will be troublesome.
Buz Reynolds asked what the actual pitch on the ; .-icket was? The applicant replied 7.5/12. Reynolds
stated that he feels that on the north side the corner X11 get a substantial load of moisture.
Perkins stated that he sees this aesthetically as not a good solution., because all the other gabled
dormers and gabled roof forms are consistently symetrical about their ridgeline, and to just take that
one and project that down is aesthetically not an acceptable solution to that problem. He thinks they
need to tear into it so they could study some proportions of different forms.
The applicant stated that this is the form that the owners wish to keep.
Sue Railton stated that she still finds the roof form very awkward and she finds no rhyme or reason
why the siding goes every which way.
Hunn asked about the natural weathered cedar. Does that mean that they would not treat the wood?
The applicant stated that it would be weather treated and then let it age.
Discussion on the grading followed. Hunn stated that there is some grading at the entry that appears
to be steeper than two to one. Regulations do not allow more than two to one. The applicant staw.i
that it is right at two to one. Hunn pointed out the area he meant and stated that there may be a
retaining wall called for.
Chairman Perkins reviewed the coi xems of the Commission as
Roof forms.
Site grading
Siding direction.
Landscaping.
The need to provide color and material samples
Jack Hunn pointed that the site plan indicate 10 foot setbacks along two roadways and he dixsn't sec
any encroachment, but it should be shown 25 feet
1 o,
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 4
1. Wildridgc Suhdr.ision, Sindhngct ' imgle Family KmdswrflrWJ)w_&n_Remcw.
Rhoda %chnrsderman mored to apps% a final de+al;n te:acw Ion lot SA, Block I. Wildridgt:, %&gect to
the gT4acsm hnropn t hack the %ampks of the raa.f and the uding rotors The nUAKM died fot lack .:f
. a mxwsd
iF4
IUW% % CW Ow waad to tart Ilew &V%4ugKm unrd the newt nrtelwryt In allow the applkuq to prarsde
awfittw ow if aatwaw civow1w.
Tow Rait+a trtcwpawlwd T)wt swsQaAa au dtiartwd w t-. a ttrm tar thttc �z-tc
hw* norma "W"d I" &mop twani drw*.b m4vrr*aa1 lrwr i d 'kit tikwck I Ma NV4W hwtauw 0(!%C
tAwiiflow i 1' 00PSOnAWS a•a# t1w f5 b" wwauptrreVnma Gear 7a. aklow Mflwadam
"Mitt WAW au• mk ow/ frsrilrcWo% a!s t ltnraawra rawsnwlaw0 tlwt +aaatwawa Tim tlaabar taiawf .teh
66"i1 1..w+,.+yw+wtba s.sMaf Am da " 'Aw ops -w#4 wawnw an a Hers wrmr tf timm twat a rtt*bm wwaa
a l"W 0,..Ww.awY-w�, par r aww+ www"m U Utah. M a w >+nm Ip 014- at# w4 w►aiwtnine Isar
—nrtt4.muM m mmwm-" *0 4M4 w %w * .w.r %.Wfttww
"to , yw,.rnaaw .46w i.w waat�raa>r +-.w+ a. ,lt+u a.K aaw►tJNa aaw+r a.13' is w fsi''rnatrI wr 'e4s rwtwa
"arrtr.A
ta.« a�,►-*..alai► ra.-aw +. .tiwr+M K1www aw-.wagsrl wort rla +�awavw ,aa«+M aAiR ltLYa�a AaplaswW�aawpw
w
Vow* . bw** ws* s ba -w r 1 WA hw oetwaaaa, maw+= -A w>wawsuft skaeo& [um tNm%v
M4.•�
A..a t..:'Aft. wrwn maw aa'rtnO :wr..•+es-u,+a.r •:a.V0- _-ay.aw-.t w.-., - 1p Wgpp*" 1 W a40*
+W -aa w..- ..-..r+r, .as •a4.. a...o a w t.a _ , «..+ ., 10 «s w..,s � '" flo'd am
"* aa. ,. 4&a O a w.- f « �. - ..r.nwrwea► a.�+ awn wD WIMP W %0
410. A.MY. 'I - -a..tw *h*- ... .... eMn.r •a w. 400 -am"" *0 stir... .* ww1 *146
.008w. -•".r ~*..4" ~ ._....,a .,a -amu« .» Qw -+ww-- .-,. saw Nw� .. A.1ftw 0.4ra 40
*ra -amm"m* +dwRfi n ♦ aVr ..M � yr • ' w ww fib ww 4mawo wtwl ft ....-er so .1+•
WW4.. GWW. ,...as ..a www QW .*.. ae .,,,40 aa. rwaaa.agt r wr 4M ,raw .0 d* a.- aw.-w%P
.war: ww..w wa.a.. vaw o .-h.; rawrr rm .W* w=rypr.++wrL1Mk s.. MN .. d* .. 440
4 1 wool 'Ya 'A -%arra* Wtww. aw. +..._ •Ay 90*weu 6W., a.AM # + ma +wa....y..yr
0 00� Au� '00�
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 5
•
Lot 55 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Shapiro Commercial Building. Final Design
Review, (cont)
E7
Discussion followed on the screening of the mechanical equipment. The applicant stated that there is a
two foot high parapet that is around that area and the one area that is up there will be approximately 2
„r feet 6 inches higher than that parapet. It will be painted in to match the background.
Jack Hunn moved to grant final design approval to Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, as
presented.
Sue Railton seconded. Jack Hunn amended his motion to include the Staff recommendation that the
off site grading and or +he constniction staging will not take place without an agreement in place with
the owners of Lot 56. Railton seconded the amendment. Chairman Perkins suggested adding that all
mechanical equipment be painted to match the surrounding wall materials in that area. Hunn so
amended his motion, Railton seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Lot 12_ Block 1. Benchmark at P -aver Creek Subdivision. Valley Wide Plumbing & Heating, Final
Design Review
Rick Pyhnan stated that Doug DeChant of Shepherd Construction Resources is representing Valley
Wide Plumbing and Heating. The Commission has seen this building at a conceptual design review
and a final design review where it was actually denied on March 16th. The exterior of the building has
been redesigned. The scope of the building remains the same. It is a two story metal building that will
be used as a plumbing warehousetheadquarters/office. The changes made to the building are very
appropriate and followed some of the suggestions that came out of the previous meetings. Staff
recommends approval.
Chairman Perkins commented that these changes are the ones the Commission was looking for and
tney make this a very nice industrial building and he stated that he would further like to commend the
applicant for their attitude and their work with the Commission. This was the general consensus of the
Commission.
Jack Hunn stated that there were some concerns about snow melting and creating a total solution and
he asked if that would be worked out with the Town Engineer. Pylman stated that the Engineer has
been up on site a couple times and it is felt that there are some solutions to it. Pylman stated that the
one detail that has not been specified in this whole project is that of the colored treatment of the
security fence.
Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve Lot 12, Block 1, commercial industrial building for final
design review, contingent upon samples for the security fence being brought back at a later dale. Buz
Reynolds seconded.
Jack Hunn questioned the matter cf no snow storage if the snow melt does not work
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 6
Lot 12, Block 1. Bebchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Valley Wide Plumbing & Heating Final
Design Review. (cont)
The motion to approve carried unanimously.
Lot 7`., Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, North Court, Final Design Review
Rick Pylman stated that this project was originally approved in March 1990. That approval has
expired. The building has been somewhat redesigned, although the site plan is essentially the same.
The building has a gabled roof form, which is a little different from the original approval. An overhang
has been added, some columns on the front facade, a little better cover for the store fronts. It is a long
ridge with gables on the ends and is a metal roof material. It is about 7000 square feet. The layout of
the building is essentially the same as before. There is a shared parking access with the lot next door,
and a second access point that is completely within this piece of property. Sidewalks have been
provided and it has been well thought out from the pedestrian standpoint. Staff recommendation is
for approval.
Mark Dok.. dson stated that they are trying to be compatible with the colors around them.
Discussion followed on the metal roof. Discussion followed on the parking. Discussion followed on
the landscape plan, and the shared dumpster. The applicant stated that they will be back with a sign
plan.
Buz Reynolds moved to approve final design review for Lot 71, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek
as submitted.
Rhoda Schneiderman seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
Lot 37_ Block 3. Wildridge Subdivision Weiland Single Family Msidence. Final Dc5ign Review
Rick Pylman stated that this is a single family residence, with a caretaker unit Pylman stated that this
is a flag lot at the end of Flat Point Road. The lot slopes down to the south at an average 38% grade
The proposed house is about 3500 square feet in size. It has a double garage and a separate single
garage. Exterior materials are stucco and wood] siding. It has some nice stone work on the house,
clad windows. Pylman stated that the applicant has decided to make some changes, so this will be a
conceptual design review. Pylman stated that it is an asphalt roof and is a pretty well designed house
and it seems to be in an appropriate location on the lot There is an issue with this house, not so much
with the Staff, but with a neighbor. There is a house that was built several years ago on the lot
immediately above this house and the neighbor is concerned about his encroachment into his view
corridor. A letter from Dr Hollingsworth, the neighbor, included in the packet, speaks to this He
references sections of the zoning code znd the Planning Commission design procedures Pytntan
reviewed the specific sections referred to. Pylman stated that view corridor of neighboring property is
a criteria the Commission can and should look at in reviewing architecture of adjacent property
^ A*S
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 7
Lot 37, Block 3. Wildridge Subdivision, Weiland Single Family Residence Final Design Review,
cont
Pylman stated that he has been up to the lot. This house will block some of his views, but he does not
know that there is another way to develop this lot. He thinks the house is in the only location that it
can go. It is a very steep lot.
Mark Donaldson stated that they are asking for conceptual design review instead of final design at this
time. The owners have some minor changes that they want to do and they will come back for final.
Donaldson stated that he felt that Dr. Hollingsworth comments are off base and his expectations are
too high for literal land use rights. He stated that the peak of the roof is about five feet above his
floor on the main level. They have done everything they can to lower the building. The owners really
wanted a third story to the building, but have eliminated this due to the concerns for the neighbor.
They are proposing to build at the far western side of the property. They have a linear design because
of the slope of the topography. With a reasonably minor amount of regrading they are able to get the
structure situated on the site very responsibly. He provided colors to be used.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she thinks it is a charming house and she hopes that they will not
change too much. The only concern she has is on the far west side there is a big band of uninterrupted
facade. Will there be a lot of landscaping in that area? Discussion followed on this matter. She asked
if they could drop the house a couple feet lower. Donaldson stated that he didn't think that it would
make much difference. There is no extra space to do this in. If they push the house deeper, the
driveway gets steeper.
Henry Vest asked what the height was from the back portion to the peak. Donaldson stated it was 33
feet. Vest stated that he thinks it is a very good looking house. Further discussion followed on the
possibility of bringing the house down. Donaldson stated that everything you try to go up or down
you jeopardize something else.
John Perkins stated he likes the building and he would like to see the applicants work with the
neighbor as much as possible.
Sue Railton echoed the same comment.
Jack Hunn asked about the width of the driveway. Donaldson atated that it is 12 feer wide of
improved asphalt. Hunn asked if the retaining wall ispermitted in the easement or will there be
approvals from the utilities companies. Pylman stated that it would require letters from the utility
companies. Hunn asked about the oversized doors. Hunn stated that one thing he is uncomfortable
with is the projection of the bay element in the center of the house on the south side He suggested
the bracket be strengthened so it is a little larger. Hunn stated that the south elevation appears to be
relatively piain and somewhat tall. This can be litigated with a good landscape solution
^ pa
t>t
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 8
Lot 37, Block 3. Wildridge Subdivision, Weiland Single Family Residence, Final Design Review,
cont
Buz Reynolds stated that he thinks the building looks good and actually works on the lot. There is
about fifty feet between the buildings and he asked if they could drop the roof to a S/12 or not.
Donaldson stated that they were looking for a certain balance and this gives the massing.
Chairman Perkins stated that since the applicant has requested conceptual review, no action will be
taken at this time. The brackets, the landscape plan should be considered, and the matter of the
neighbor's concerns should be considered.
Lot 16, Filing 1_Eaglebend Subdivision. Tony Seibert. Duplex. Final Design Review.
Rick Pylman stated that this is a 16,000 sq. ft. duplex lot that slopes south towards the river. This lot
is just to the west of Chris Ekrem's lot. Staff had a couple concerns regarding the house. The first
concern is that it really does not meet our definition of a duplex. It is really two separate structures
that are very tenuously connected. The second concern is a height problem. Pylman stated that he did
receive a drawing about 4PM that are revised elevations that shows some hip roof formL to correct the
height problems. He stated that he has not had a chance to run through those calculations For the
purpose of the design review, he suggested assuming that they are correct He stated that it is a
vertical board and batten siding in a blue grey color, standing seam metal roof, window and door trim
is a 1 x 4 cedar. It is a good landscape plan and includes an irrigation system Site lighting is provided
by wall fights. It does meet all other zoning requirements It has adequate snow storage and adequate
parking. Staff is concerned with the definition of a duplex
Tony Seibert stated the site was originally approved in 1991 for two buildings very similar to this
That approval has expired He stated that he had the architect modif- the plans in terms of increasing
the size, slipping the buildings back and forth and modifving the buildings so that then dod rx t look like
mirror images. He stated that he believes the architect has addressed the hcight question in the new
plans. He described how this was done The matter of two separate buildings has also been addressed
on the new plans, by attaching a small portion of the living rooms, creating a common wall, making it
one building. He stated that they are trying to create the essrnce of a vngle family without %wasting
the technical or legal definition
Sue Railton stepped down as a voting member of the Comriusuon, due to a ctxetlw-t of tra"ry
Tony Seibert read inte the record a letter from John Rulim the arc utect lr war, a ree:ieest fi.r final
design approval, stating that I The project is d"grW to prttv)dc pnvacy. mr tvduahty. sed a
maximum of view and light with windows on all sides. (cx each unit T'he real estate mmiet re%pot+si+
positively to this type of design 2 A large wxk and deep cTm laedscape epics is prvvldeai hetwev-
the two units to provide a useful and practical erurance ctaiut with a %ivAal camamiam bActuvice the
street front and the river .1 The k)t is large aril deep TTee rte co%vwW aril habetable any we veil
below the allowable use 4 Me design. whhe pRnldu* a um(wd archete:tutal Jupicz it aaire
., '4 #
PLANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION :!MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 9
Lot 16, Filing 1. Ea ebend Subdivision, Tony Seibert Duplex, Final Design Review. (cont)
provides massing of garages, and site iocations of the units to avoid any duplex mirror image design
element. 5. The two adjacent lots are developed with a single large residence. Design criteria is to
design the project to be forward to obtain river views, but also to maintain a street frontage similar in
distance to the adjacent houses. The separation and open spaces between the two units achieves this
requirement. Also, the adjacent houses are not built to the side setback fines, providing good sideyard
spaces between all buildings. Parking on the street is not allowed. They have provided four garaged
cars, four visitor parking spaces and four more cars can be parked in front of the garage doors.
Pylman read into the record the definition of a duplex dwelling: A detached building containing two
dwelling units, designed for or used as a dwelling exclusively by two families, each living as an
independent housekeeping unit.
Pylman stated that he does not see a building containing two dwelling units. He sees two buildings.
Perkins stated that architecturally it is a good job, but this issue has come up before.
Reynolds stated that he likes the setup.
Hunn stated that he thinks it is a great concept, he does think that, based on the definition, approval
would not be permited.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated that instead of individuality it looks very much the same She likes the
concept of how the buildings are grouped. She felt that if there is a connecting wall the definition
could be stretched.
Henry Vest feels that the connection is out of place. He also questioned the positioning of sonic of the
windows on one elevation
John Perkins stated that he feels that this pushes a little too far on the definition of a duplex
Therefore, he feels uncomfortable with giving approval at this time
Tony Seibert stated he thinks that the definition hangs on the word huilding It is his opinion that .;
building is any residential cube, if you will, connected by continuous walls 7Txw have in fact lcgalk
met that requirement
Jack Nunn moved to table Lot 16, Filing I. Eaglebend Subdivision
Rhoda Schneiderman suggested that the motion include a request for a masmng model, and cAof and
roof samples be provided
Schneiderman seconded and the motion canicd «nh lfcnrs % est soung nn
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 10
Lot 16, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision, Tony Seibert Duplex, Final Design Review, (cont)
Sue Railton stated, from the floor, that if they are going to work strictly from the statement about a
duplex building and they are not going to take into accot int the environment that they have already
created down that street what use is a model going to be.
Perkins stated that it may prove that it is two houses. We still have to consider the regulations and we
have a staff recommendation for denial on the grounds that it does not meet our regulations.
Schneiderman stated that she would like to see how the setback does effect the look of the building.
Tony Seibert asked for som direction. Perkins stated that the direction he has heard is that they would
like to see a model and if you are uncomfortable with a model, that you rethink the connection of the
building. Seibert asked how much connection does he need? Seibert stated he doesn't understand
why this is being turned down when we have three other duplexes that have been approved on this
street, designed by the same architect, using the similar concept of two small buildings. Considerable
discussion followed on this matter.
Lot 4. Block 3. Wildridge Subdivision, Farr Single Family Residence. Final Design Review
Rick Pylman stated that Mr. Farr is proposing a single family log home. It is a duplex lot and has
about a 20% slope down to the south. this has not gone through conceptual review. It is 3300 square
feet in size with a one car garage. It is a single story with a walkout basement and includes a loft. is is
constructed out of 8" logs. White stucco is used as a finished material on the lower level. Some river
rock will be utilized on the chimney as an accent. Aluminum clad windowsin an adobe brown color,
ftsicas will also be brown, soffits will be tongue and groove left natural. It is a gabled roof with a
forty year guarantee asphalt shingle that does meet the weight requirements, in a Coco brown color
Pylman stated that the landscape plan is adequate, however, there should be some plant material added
to the east of the parking area. No sod is planned on the lot All disturbed areas will be revegetated
with a dry land grass mix. There are some exterior lights planned at the exit doors and at the garage
door. Pylman stated that there is a good grading plan and everything seems to be in order Staff has
recommended approval with the condition that some landscape material be added and a suggestion
that a drip irrigation system be put in to maintain the landscaping
Arthur Farr agreed that he would add landscaping to the cast of the parking area He had a concern
about the drip irrigation regarding erosion He will talk to his landscaper ahoul that He would rather
hand water the landscaping
Reynolds asked if the applicant had given any thought to giving dormer details to the linear sides of
the building since it was so long It %%oold give more definition rather than the txixv Ivok
••
PLANNING AMD ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
• Page I I
Lot 4, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Farr Single Family Residence. Final Design Review. (cont)
• Jack Hunn questioned the change from a stone base to stucco. Hunn asked if the chimney would go
all the way down or does it stop at the deck. The applicant stated it would go all the way down.
Hunn asked if the driveway would be paved. The applicant responded that it would be concrete.
Hunn commented on the driveway being almost flat. Hunn suggested putting a dormer on the south
elevation. Not only would it help the appearance, but would open up some of the views. Hunn stated
that more attention should be given to screening the extra parking area. He stated that he would
recommend an automatic watering system.
Sue Railton feels that it needs some feature to make it more interesting. It is much too bland and boxy.
John Perkins echoed that concern. He stated that maybe this house is so simple that it might not quite
fit in. It needs perhaps better window fenestration.
Henry Vest stated that he feels the same way. He feels the applicant could make it more interesting.
Rhoda Schneiderman suggested deeper overhangs, and the divided windows make the windows seem
smaller. She feels there will be too much stucco, unless more windows are added to open it up and
not make it so singular at the bottom.
Mr. Farr stated that as far as the look of the house, this has been built to his budget and there is not
much he can do to change it. He stated that he is building his home, but the Commission has an idea
of what they want it to look like, so he needs to know, specificaly, what doesn't work there, besides
there is too much stucco. Should he use wood siding or some other covering that would look good?
The main floor is log and the bottom floor has to be covered with something. He thought the rock
was too much and changed it to stucco, now that is too much.
John Perkins stated that they are not here to design his project. He reiterated the comments by the
Commission as follows:
Longer overhangs
Perhaps a dormer or dormers to develop interest and shadow patterns
Window selections and locations need to be evaluated and some need to be enlarged
Suggest wood corners on stucco
Address landscape issue Hand watering not recommended
Jack Hunn moved to table Lot 4, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision.
Henry Vest seconded and the motion carried unanimously
14 A 00'-�
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 12
Lot 102, Block 1. Wildridg Subdivision, Fourplex. Conceptual Design Review
Rick Pylman stated that Mike Bruen has a fourplex project that is next to the Ski Vista Project, which
Mr. Bruen did. It is a light bluish grey channel lap siding, there is some stucco on the lower level.
The window trim is 1 x 4, fascia is 2 x 10. The hip roof with a series of dormers is utilized. The
architect has done a good job of breaking up the building form for a fourplex building. As a
conceptual review, no staff recommendation is made.
Mike Bru :n stated that they are trying to stay in the level that they accomplished on the Ski Vista
project. The units are about 1700 sq. ft. The colors are close to the rendering.
Perkins stated that he feels this is a good proposal. He asked about trash collection. The applicant
stated that there will be a place in each individual garage a place to store trash. Perkins asked about
an identification sign. The applicant stated that there would be one.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated she liked the project.
Henry Vest stated he also likes the project.
Sue Railton had no comments.
Jack Hunn stated that he thinks it is a very attractive project. He commended them on the Ski Vista
project. He stated that the two tree islands that help relieve the front elevation might need to be
protected from the snow plowing. there is a lot of asphalt, so the amount of landscaping on the south
side might be beefed up tohelp to litigate the impact.
Buz Reynolds stated he liked the project.
Chairman Perkins stated that the applicant should proceed.
Atl[!97A`:1IF�i7El�i1' K
Rick Pylman stated that this is really not a duplex. It is more of a single family with a caretaker
apartment The lot slopes away from the mad to the southeast at about 10%. The southwestern
design building is about 3000 sq ft in the pria:ary unit and a little under a 1000 sq. ft, in the rental
apartment. The structure has three levels The garage and aparment on the lower level, main living
area in the middle and a master bedroom suite on the third level. Predominant finish is a red sandstone
stucco with Ing work used as accents and window trim. It is a Flat roof. Some site lighting on the
driveway. rhe front has significant landscaping, but the rest is left relatively natural.
Discussion followed on the windows being indented. Discussion followed on the stepping elements
and the accents beinh; too trendy It was suggested that it might be kept simpler.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 13
Lot 28, Block t Wildridge Subdivision Orcutt Duplex Conceptual Design Review, (cont)
Jack Hunn asked about the street access. He felt that a better solution could be found. Considerable
discussion followed on this matter.
Sue Railton stated that she liked the detail.
Henry Vest agreed that some of the log detail should be cut back. He thought the applicant should
consider maybe cutting down on the windows. He asked about the red sandstone color and how red it
would be. The applicant stated that it would be the same color as the hills in the back of it. It will be
a stucco fi6sh.
Chairman Perkins reiterated the Commission comments as follows:
Driveway area is too large, cut down the asphalt areas.
Too manv for the false details
Site strategy may need to be evaluated as far as the c+riveway location.
Cut and fill analysis for driveway
Samples of colors to be provided.
Discussion followed of whether the corners are rounded or square. the Commission felt that rounding
the corners would help.
It was suggested that the applicant consider the adjacent properties in the area w'ten choosing the
color of the house.
More discussion followed, but several people were talking at once, therefore no transcription is
possible
(fit 63. Block 1 .Wild>7 ge Sa ivJ ior> Guida Single Family Residence Conceotua! Design Review
Rick Pylman stated that this is a single family residence with a lock off apartment. It is at the end of
Fax Lane Michael Hazard is the architect The lot is pretty steep at 35%. It is a two story structure
of 3600 sq ft of habitable space. Building materials are cedar siding and stucco, clad windows and
wood trim The roof is a Cemwood tile. Colors have not been chosen yet.
Michael Hazard stated that they will have to shift the house a bit due to an encroachment of a roof
overhang into the side setback
Buz Reynolds asked what the composition of the Cemwood product is. Mike Guida stated that it is
chips of wood mixed in with cement. Pennatex is another name for it. It looks like slate tile. John
Perkins asked if they are putting a sod roof on the garage The applicant stated that his wife wanted
®ular roof on it He is still thinking about whether or not to put a gable on it or just put a flat roof.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 14
Lot 63, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision, Guida Single Family Residence, Conceptual Design Review,
cont
Michael Hazard wants to keep the low profile while approaching the house where you don't actually
see the garage until you get around the curve and down in to the property. Perkins stated it would
seem better to look down on a sod covered roof than just a flat ballasted roof. He stated he could see
the point of keeping it low. Discussion followed on this matter, but there were several people talking
at once and it is difficult determining what is being said by any one person. Perkins stated :he thinks it
is a great house and the applicant should proceed.
Henry Vest asked if there is a band around where it goes from stucco to siding. The applicant stated
that he has not really determined that at this time, but he knows he will have to do something at that
point. Vest asked how wide the driveway was going into the parking lot The applicant replied it was
12 feet. Discussion followed on the backup and maneuvering space. The applicant stated that they
think they will have to use a boulder wall to hold grade down there.
Perkins asked what the landscaping concepts were. The applicant replied that at this point somewhat
rough.
Jack Hunn asked what the drive grade was. The applicant replied approximately 10 % to 6 or 71/6.
Hunn stated that he thinks the garage being a earth sheltered non -architectural form would enhance
the project Further discussion followed on the landscaping.
The general consensus of the board was that the garage should be sod.
Rick Pylman stated that last year Wal-Mart had a garden center that was pretty much a disaster Wal-
Mart is asking to erect a greenhouse this year. Pylman stated that it will be a vast improvement over
last year He stated that if the Commission wants to tum it over to Staff, they can deal with it
Discussion followed on the use of cinder blocks for fence posts.
Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve the temporary greenhouse, with Staff approval
Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously
Rcadi0g antapproval of the Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes of Mush 16, 1993
Jack Hunn moved to approve the minutes of the March 16, 1993 as submitted
Henry Vest seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
April 6,1993
Page 15
Other Business
• Rick Pylman stated that there was a memo in the packet regarding the six month review of a Special
Review Use granted for an attorney. The conditon of the approval was that if there were no
complaints within the six mor.th period, the Special Review Use would become final. There have been
no complaints, therefore Staff feels that the SRU approval is final.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Charlette Pascuzzi
Recording Secretary
Commissi4
I Perkins
S Railton
R Schneic
A Reynolds
P Dixon "
____T_
H Vest
1 Hunn