Loading...
PZC Minutes 061593.• a -0 ok RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15, 1993 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on June 15, 1993, at 7:35 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, 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 Chairman Perkins stated all members were present except Jack Hunn and Patti Dixon. They both rrrived a few minutes later. Election of Officers Chairman Perkins opened nominations for Chairman. Henry Vest nominated John Perkins as Chairman. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded. With no other nominations forthcoming, the Chairman closed the nominations for Chairman. John Perkins was unanimously elected Chairman. Chairman Perkins opened nominations for Vice Chairman, Buz Reynolds nominated Jack Hunn as Vice Chairman. Sue Railton seconded. With no other nominations made, Chairman Perkins closed the nominations for Vice Chairman. Jack Hunn was unanimously elected Vice Chairman. Chairman Perkins opened nominations for Secretary. I* Is A 0A PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 2 Election of Officers. (cont) Rhoda Schneiderman nominated Patti Dixon for Secretary. Henry Vest seconded. John Perkins nominated Sue Railton for Secretary. Patti Dixon seconded. With no other nominations made, Chairman Perkins closed the nominations for Secretary. Chairman Perkins called the for the vote for Sue Railton for Secretary. The vote was five to one, Jack Hunn having left the room, electing Sue Railton Secretary. Patti Dixon received one vote. Lot 14/15. Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Height and Parking Variance Request Public Hearin¢ Rick Pylman stated that there was a condition in the staff recommendation that the grading plan be approved by the Town Engineer. The Town Engineer had some serious concerns with the grading plan and he actually working with the applicants now. Pylman suggested postponing discussion of the variance and the final design review until later in the evening. The Commission agreed. Lot 55, Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivisiom Sign Program. Final Design Review Rick Pylman stated that Shapiro Development Company has received final design approval for a two story commercial building on Lot 55. High Tech Signs is developing a comprehensive sign program for that building. The program does include provisions for canvas awnings, for some neon illuminated signs, for information kiosks and for some traffic and directional signage. The Staff has reviewed the program and thinks it is complete and is appropriate to the building. He thinks the concept of the program is fine. There are a couple places that the language needs to be clarified, as to intent. Alan Aarons, High Tech Signs, stated that the sign plan is designed to coordinate the entire building. Because there are no existing tenants at this time, they do not have specifics in the way of logos or names, to present. At this time the building will be known as the Century 21 Building. It is basically an awning program. There will be awnings, in a burgundy color, all the way around the building on the first floor, covering the five panels, with limited use on the second floor, if the landlord chooses to use them, covering only three panels out of the five. The awnings on the second floor will not project as far out as the ground floor awnings. All of the awnings will be backlit in the area of the logo, etc. The landlord is requesting an option on the second floor awning. That is of staying with the burgundy color or going to a dark forest green color. Regardless of which color is used, it will be used exclusively on the second floor. The center frame of the building will have free standing lettering on the wall. They will be some sort of metal letters. The lighting will be hidden inside of the lettering. this will happen in the front of the building and in the rear of the building. All of the other signage is required signage, parking, handicap, etc. They are requesting four free standing monument signs - two at the main entrances and two smaller signs for directional signage. They have been designed to coordinate with the kiosks that have already been approved. They will have mock roofs to match the building. The body will be of a stucco or a light stone face to match the surface of the building. The panels will be recessed and be the same colors as the awnings and also be backlit on the lettering only. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 3 Lot 55, Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Sign Program_Final Design Review (cont) Discussion followed on the awning sizes. Rhoda Schneiderman questioned the approval of the kiosks. She also asked if the awnings would be enclosed underneath. Aaron stated they would be. She asked what would happen if only one tenant on the second floor decided to put up an awning. Aaron replied it would be up to the landlord. Aarons stated that he had neglected to mention that they were requesting an option to use either awnings or neon signs on the second floor only. It would be either all awnings or all neon. Rick Pylman stated that something that is not in the sign program, that could be added is that any sign put on the building must be in compliance with the comprehensive sign program. That gives the Town enforcement for the bar or restaurant that puts the Budweiser, etc. signs up. Aarons stated that the sign program is designed to provide for identification signs, not advertising signs. Discussion followed on how many tenants would be on the second floor. Pylman stated that the number of signs is restricted to one per window grouping. Considerable discussion followed on this matter. Buz Reynolds stated he likes the awning program and could go with the use of two colors, but he does not like the introduction of neon into the sign program. He would rather see it as otte sign program for the whole building. Sue Railton stated she did n -,t see anything wrong with the sign program. It reflects flexibility and a bit of interest. John Perkins stated he could see both sides. Further discussion followed on how to control the use of the neon. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she could support it if it was worded that it was strictly awnings on the first floor and a maximum of three on the second floor. Jack Hunn asked what the material under the awning would be. Mr. Aarons stated that it would probably be a honeycomb material. Hunn asked about the monument sign showing Century 21 Building, Avon Center at Beaver Creek? Aarons stated that the official name of the Avon Center is Avon Center at Beaver Creek. Hunn stated his concern is that these two buildings do a lot for Avon and he thinks that Avon is ready to stand on it's own without being tagged to Beaver Creek. The Beaver Creek can be dropped. Discussion followed on where the kiosk is located. Discession followed on the matter of what would be allowed on the signs (percentage of name and percentage of type of business). Rick Pylman suggested the Commission give the applicant some direction and have them rewrite the sign program accordingly. The Commission further discussed their concerns. The Commission decided to do a motion with conditions so the applicant would not have to go through this again. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to grant final design review approval for the sign program for Lot 55, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, with the following condition: 1. All awnings be installed at the same time per floor. IMi Imo► �` ^ PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSKON MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 4 Lot 55, Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Sign PrcK4m. Final Design Review cont 2. That no less than 50% of each sign reflect the actual name of the business. A maximum of three neon signs be allowed on the second floor per each side of the building. 4. The language be clarified and the final sign program be approved by Staff. Sue Railton seconded and the motion carried with Patti Dixon and Buz Reynolds voting nay. Lot 62, Block 3. Wildridee Subdivision. McMahon Residence, Design Change Request, Final Design Review Rick Pylman stated that the McMahons received approval a few months ago and the project is actually under construction now. They are requesting a minor design change. The building had a two car garage and they are now requesting to add an additional bay to the garage to make it a three car garage. Pylman described the revised elevation and revised site plan. Staff thinks it looks fine. There is a little bit of concern about the grading exceeding a two to one bank, but this is solvable. The applicant stated that he had nothing else to add. Jack Hunn moved to approve the design change for Lot 62, Block 3, Wildridge. Buz Reynolds seconded. Under discussion the motion was amended to add the condition that the Staff work with the applicant to correct the grading concern. The motion carried unanimously. Lot 4. Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Commercial, Conceptual Design Review Rick Pylman stated that the Commission has seen this at a conceptual design review previously. Ron Bifani is back and has done some work on the proposal. He is proposing to construct and operate a Goodyear Automotive Service Center and a Car Wash. It is a.70 acre Neighborhood Commercial lot on Nottingham Road. it is the western most commercial lot in that commercial area. It is adjacent to Buck Creek There are eight interior automotive service bays where repair work can take place. Two automatic car wash bays are proposed. There are no manual wash bays. There is office space, storage space, and above the office area is an employee housing unit. The proposal does meet all the zoning requirements, height, setback, lot coverage. There is an extensive setback along the west property line, due to Buck Creek, a thirty foot setback along the west property line, a twenty five foot setback along the front, and the east side is the standard seven and a half foot, and the rear is a ten foot setback. The building is a split faced block. The upper level of the apartment is a cedar board siding with a gable roof, fiberglass shingles. Pylman stated that there were some conditions at the Special Review Use Hearing that related specifically to the design review process. They were: ^ 01% r. .. PLANNING AND CONING COMMISSION MEETING Mir41Ma June 15,1993 Page 5 Lot 4, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Commercial, Conceptual Design Review. cont 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission should ensure that potential negative impacts to the residential property to the west are addressed during the design review process. Factors critical to review include lighting plan, building architecture, landscape buffers, trash storage, noise buffers, and general site plan. 2. A catch basin design must ensure that any site runoff is filtered and all oil, gasoline, soap, etc. be removed prior to discharge. 3. No underground storage tanks allowed. 4. No auto repair or service will take place outside. There will be no storage of junk vehicles or miscellaneous parts outside. Trash receptacle and used tires waiting for proper disposal should be stored in a well screened area. As a conceptual review there is no formal staff recommendation. At the previous review the Commission talked about concerns with garage doors facing the residential area to the west, the noise associated with the operation when the garage doors are open, the arrangement of the landscaping, lack of landscaping to the east and south and the long flat roof on the building. The roof form has been addressed, the landscaping material has been rearranged and a planting strip has been added to the east boundary. Mr. Bifani did submit a letter, copies of which have been provided, that talks about the noise of impact wrenches. The operational sound at the source is 99 decibels at 65 feet away, which is the distance of the building to the property line to the west. At a distance of 65 feet, the decibel meter tested that sound at 70 to 75 decibels. That is about the same decibel level as a truck driving by at 65 feet away, or normal street noise. Michael Thompson, the architect, stated that they would show the lighting plan in detail at the final stage, but essentially, the building overhangs around the edges of the apartment and the overhangs where the garage doors are, there are down lights. There will be a minimum number of small three foot lights shining down in areas where people need to go from parking to the building. He stated the colors shown on the rendering are very close to the actual colors. They will use two kinds of split faced block. They will be coloring the block. There is an accent band that goes around the building. There are 8 x 8 accent blocks around the top and bottom corners of all the windows. The difference between the two colors will not be extreme. For the windows there will be a black metal frame. There is a mansard roof that is three feet tall. just around the garage doors on both sides. It is a cedar vertical batten siding, so it will have some shadow lines. That will be a light brown/beige color. The cedar channel lap siding on the apartment is going to be the same color as the mansard roof. Cedar rough sawn fascia boards will be used around the gabled roofs and dormers. That will be a slightly darker brown color than the siding. The sloped roof will be a black shingle roofing. 00 ^ .-, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 6 Lot 4. Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Commercial, Conceptual Design Review. cont He stated that the landscape buffers they have created are essentially along the stream bank. There is a good sized cottonwood there now, which blocks some of the neighboring property. He described on the plans where they will cluster some blue spruce and some aspen trees. He described the plantings for the front and the lower left hand corner. They would like to wait until they see what the newspaper plant landscape plans might show and work with them jointly on landscaping the eastern side. There will be a single dumpster. He stated that this will be screened with a wall the same as the building. He discussed the location of the only neighbor and the fact that there are just a few windows that face in the direction of the proposed project. He then reviewed the letter regarding the noise, stating that the 65 feet would be to the property fine and the condominium unit is an additional 30 or 35 feet away. Also when the tests were made at the other shop, there was not another door on the other side of the shop. If both doors are open there should be some reduction in the sound. He described the entrance and exit and how the traffic flow would work. He then described how the drainage would work. He stated that he would provide the exact design of the catch basins at the final design review. There will be no underground storage tanks. There will be no outside service. He stated that the old tires would be dropped into the basement for storage. Buz Reynolds stated that even though they want to work with the neighbor next door, the neighbor next door might be ten years from now. He would like to see something on both the south and east property lines. Also, he feels the dumpster needs a roof. He also asked that, if there is any question of noise from the neighbors, is there a possibility that the doors on the west side could be shut. Mr. Thompson stated that one item he forgot to mention was that originally they had tall doors on both sides of the building to allow taller vehicles. They have since, because of this concern, reduced the height of all the doors on the western side to 10', which will not accommodate a tall vehicle. Jack Hunn stated that he is concerned with where the customers are expected to park. Mr. Thompson described how the parking would work. They did not want to clutter up the front of the building with cars. Hunn asked about the tire storage. Ron Bifani stated that the previous statement was not correct. The tires will be cut up and will go into the dumpster or to a place in Gypsum that uses tires for fuel. The new tires will be stored in the basement. All displays will be inside of the office. Hunn asked if the car wash has doors. He is concerned with the noise of the car wash. He stated that he does not necessarily disagree with the DB readings presented, but he still thinks that the -neighbors who attended the previous meeting saw a building that had a very different orientation, and that orientation was more sympathetic to their concerns and this building is now rotated ninety degrees orienting the business side of the building right toward the residential neighbor. He realizes that there is a challenge with the creek setback, but he is concerned that those neighbors left the meeting expecting that the Commission would consider some of the impacts on them and understanding certain site orientation, this is a very different project. Mr. Thompson stated that there is only one window on the end of those condos. They have a berm and big trees already on their own property. This building is just about as faraway from their building as the interstate is. Reynolds asked if they had considered PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 7 Lot 4 Block 1 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Commercial, Conceptual Design Review, cont berming the west side. Rick Pylman stated that the way the setback reads is that the 30 foot strip must be left in it's natural condition. It does allow planting so trees can be added. Hunn suggested using all vertical siding, and bringing the cedar facade down to the top of the doors. Sue Railton stated she liked the variation in the colors and the garage doors and she thinks that the two glass panels they look much better than a lot of them that are presented. She stated she has difficulty with the architecture of the two ends. particularly with the office. It looks like a house with a garage tacked on the back. The architecture of the buildings need to be better integrated so that they are more compatible. She finds the connecting piece on the bottom elevation to the house like form with the garage form is very awkward. Look at the roof forms and make it one building rather than three buildings. She suggested using the split face on the base of the building . Thompson stated that this was done in response to the objection to the previous flat roof. Henry Vest stated he thinks they have done a very good job. He asked what the size of the fascia band was. The applicant replied that it was 2 x 12. Vest agreed with the comments from Sue Railton regarding the use of the split face on the base of the building and also the use of vertical batten. He felt that the lack of landscaping on the eastern side is the only weak spot. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she did not think a black roof would work. She suggested a dark brown. She asked about the sizes of the trees on the west end. The applicant replied the spruce trees would be 8 and 10 feet tall and the aspens would be 4 to 6 inch caliper. Schneiderman asked about the garage door mechanisms. She stressed that they should be silent. The applicant stated that they had not decided yet. Schneiderman stated that she wants to make sure that the time schedules discussed at the Special Review hearing would still be in force. The applicant replied that they would. Schneiderman stated that she agrees with the vertical siding and the use of the masonry posts. Sue Railton stated that she would like to see the roof almost the same tone as the darker tone of the building. Patti Dixon stated that she likes the color of the split block. She would be concerned if the color of the block turned out to be more beige than the darker taupe as it shows. A black/brown roof color should be used. She stated she likes the red accent. She stated that she would like to see landscaping on the eastern side. She asked if there are windows on the car wash end. The applicant stated that there are three windows there. It is for looks more than light, because of the big wall. John Perkins stated that he feels it needs landscaping along the freeway exposure as well as the east side. He stated that previously he had concerns regarding the clearance between the parking and the car wash. The applicant stated that they had solved that matter. Perkins stated that the sensitivity of the neighbors and the orientation of the building is still a concern he has. He stated that architecturally ISA PLANNING AND ZONING CONMSSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 8 Lot 4. Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Commercial Conceptual Design Review cont it has improved, but is not quite there. He agrees with Sue Railton. He thinks that raising the roof a bit higher on the wash bay would give it a little more of an offset and perhaps extending a cantilever situation on the front rather than just having the columns flush with the wall above might help. Sue Railton asked if there could be some nice landscaping up against the building. The applicant stated that they felt planting in that area would not survive and also, they want the planting next to the street, and cars will be pulling in under there. Jack Hunn asked about the roof top garden for the apartment. The applicant stated that there is a flat roof over the service bays and that will be accessible from the employee housing unit. There will be some patio furniture etc. The mansard will screen it. The applicant stated that this will be included with the drawings for final design review. Chairman Perkins soled that those are the Commission comments that the applicant should consider when preparing for final design review. No formal action is taken at conceptual review. Lot 6. Block 5. Wildridge Subdivision. Barrows Six Units Conceptual Design Review Rick Pylman stated that this is a conceptual design review for two triplexes. The Commission has seen this project once before at conceptual design review. At that time the Commission did give some direction, which the applicant has done a good job of following. He changed the building location, separated it from a single sixplex into a two triplex, dropped the driveway quite a bit down the site to follow the contours. The driveway grade is much less. The parking lot, garages and turnarounds work much better. This is a good site plan for the project. It is a 28% slope across the lot. The driveway is now held at a 10% grade. Site coverage is only seven percent. The driveway is paved, parking is adequate, snow storage is adequate and the grading plan is good. This is conceptual and no landscape plan has been submitted. Also, are the meters on the building? It does meet setback requirements. There are some boulder retaining walls. Building materials are: asphalt shingles, stucco wall material; wood will be used for fascia, soffits, wood clad windows, wood doors and wood trim. The trash enclosure will be a matching stucco structure. Stan Barrows stated that he would come back with a more detailed landscape plan at final design review. Patti Dixon stated that she thinks the buildings fit very well to the site. She asked about the decks. The apphcant stated that he wants to use for the balusters chunks of aspen, and white skirting and white railings. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 9 Lot 6, Block 5. Wildridge Subdivision Barrows Six Units Conceptual Design Review, (cont) Rhoda Schneiderman stated that this is a major improvement over the last submittal. She asked if he was planning on the whole building being stucco. She suggested adding another material in there somewhere. She askee v,hat the gabled forms over the windows would be. The applicant stated that those would be wood. Schneiderman asked if the roof would be asphalt arid the applicant replied yes. Schneiderman stated that the minimums for a landscape plan are two inch caliper for aspens and minimum six foot high for spruce, etc. Henry Vest asked if the roof pitches are going to be the same on the popups vs. the regular. The applicant replied on the front it will be almost like a skylight. The pitches will be the same. The back is higher. Vest stated that as far as the balusters go, as a personal opinion, he thinks the knarled look on a regular deck would look out of character. Vest suggested another material on the stucco, maybe a belly band around the building. Vest stated that the meter:, must be on the building. or between the buildings. No pedestal at the front of the property. Vest asked about the retaining walls. The applicant stated that they would be boulders. John Perkins stated that he thinks this is a great improvement over the last submittal. He likes that the two buildings are not mirror image. He stated that he would discourage the asper, balusters. The enclosure for the dumpster should be well done. perhaps with a roof. He would like to see a good landscape plan presented. He encouraged the applicant to proceed. The applicant suggested putting the dumpster under the stairs. Sue Railton stated that her only concern was the roof line at the back. The applicant stated he can match it. Jack Hunn stated he agrees with the comments made. He feels it is very much improved. He would like to see the third story roof be consistent with the back roof and the front roof. He agrees with the comment about the belly band and perhaps a different colored stucco could be used below it. He feels that the site plan is as good as it is going to get and yet it will be restrictive on parking. He suggested limiting the number of cars in a lease. Discussion followed on this matter. Buz Reynolds agreed with everything that has been discussed. Rhoda Schneiderman suggested doing the belly band in the same rough style wood as the lentils. Chairman Perkins stated that those were the Commission comments to consider. Lot 18, Block 1. WildridQe Subdivision, FouMlex. Conceptual Design Review Rick Pylman stated that Ron Preston, representing Parkwood Realty has submitted a fourplex for conceptual review. He stated that this is the lot that had a foundation on it a few years ago. The average slope of the lot is 10%. There is a 7% grade on the driveway. The lot coverage is 16%; the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 10 Lot 18, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision Fourplex, Conceptual Design Review. (cont) driveway is paved; parking is adequate; snow storage is adeg4ate; grading plan is adequate; landscape plan is adequate; and the plant sizes do meet the criteria. The meters location is a question. There are a couple setback issues to take care of on the plans. It is a fourplex that is about 1800 square feet per unit. Roof height needs to come down a couple feet. It shows 37 feet now. Asphalt shingles, cedar siding, stucco with some stone accent elements are to be used. Fascia is a 2 x 10 cedar, soffits are T-111. Windows are aluminum clad with a 1 x 4 cedar trim and the doors will be painted metal. Other than the setback matter and the excessive height, Staff feels this is a good plan. Ron Preston provided color renderings of the elevations. Regarding the meters, they are shown on the lower level plans next to the garage. He stated'that he would figure out a way to solve the setback encroachment of the overhangs. He will adjust the building height two feet. Buz Reynolds stated he liked all the elevations, except the west elevation. He can see a couple windows, What was the thinking on this. The applicant replied that the west elevation looks right back into the hill. Reynolds asked if thzy would be wood burning fireplaces. The applicant stated that they would be gas. Reynolds liked the darker colors better than the lighter ones. Jack Hunn stated that this looks a lot better than the last one proposed. He likes that fact that they are not mirror images. There is a lot of interesting architectural features. If the height problem can be solved and a good landscaping is presented, he would support this project. Sue Railton stated that she thinks it is a competent design and the applicant should go ahead with the project. Henry Vest stated that he thinks it is good. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she likes it too. She likes the darker colors. She urged the applicant to provide major landscaping. Patti Dixon asked if the stucco on the fireplace only has the rock at the bottom. The applicant stated it did. Dixon stated that she prefers the darker colors and feels this is a nice plan. John Perkins asked what the canted surface on the chimney masses is covered with. The applicant's reply is not audible. Perkins urged the applicant to bring a nice landscape plan. Tract N. Wildridge Subdivision, Wildwood Public Works Facility Final Design Review John Perkins stepped down and Chairman due to a conflict of interest. Jack Hunn presided as the acting Chairman. okk orik e PLANNING AND ZONING CCDM IN MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page l l Tract N. Wildridge Subdivision, Wil i kwd Public Works Facility. Final Design Review. (cont) Rick Pylman stated that the lot slopes about 20%. The driveway is virtually flat. There is about a four foot drop across the eighty feet. Lot coverage is not really applicable, because it is a very big tract of land. All of the operating surfaces will be paved with asphalt. Parking is adequate. Snow storage is adequate and the grading plan is good. Landscape plan will be discussed. Meters will be on the building and screened from view. It does meet setback requirements. It is a 44 ft. x 50 ft. three bay garage facility, in an earth shelter design. John Perkins stated that at conceptual it was a four bay building, but has been cut down to a three bay building, due to financial constraints. All the exposed surfaces will be pre -cast. It will be a pre - colored textured pre -cast paneling. Perkins provided color samples that will match the surrounding terrain, in brown and sage. Discussion followed on the exposed aggregate to be used. Discussion followed on the meter locations, which will be on the side near the van doors. The elevation on top of the south elevation is what will be seen from the west. He explained how the overcut would be done. Perkins stated that currently this dcsign includes a half bath, however it may not be included due to the distance for getting water. He described the doors to be used, however, several people were talking at the same time and his description is not clear. Discussion followed on the height of the doors and the overhangs. The lighting was discussed. Perkins stated that the employees would park their cars inside. Also, if they parked along the west retaining wall the cars would not be seen from the road. There will be no signage. Perkins stated that the landscaping has been kept to a minimum. He would like to concentrate three six to eight foot blue spruce with a clump of aspen behind that on the lower side of the driveway so that it would be screened from the cars that come around the curve heading up. He would also use one similar size blue spruce and some more aspen on the other side of the drive to kind of screen it. The Commission felt that this should be contingent upon the access to water. Buz Reynolds moved to grant final design approval for Tract "N', Wildridge Subdivision, Public Works Facility as submitted. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded. Reynolds amended his motion to include that the meters be on the building. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded the amendment and the motion carried unanimously. Mr. Perkins returne 1 as a voting member of the Commission. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve the minutes of the June 1, 1993 meeting. Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Lots 14/15.Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Height and Parking Variance Request, Public Hearing, and Final Design Review Rick Pylman stated that there has been a request to table these two items that were first on the agenda and postponed to the end of the meeting 00 0*4 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 12 Lots 14/15, Block 1. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision Heivht and Parking Variance Request, public hearing and Final Design Review, (cont) Buz Reynolds moved to table these two items. Henry Vest seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Other Business The Alpines at Eaglebend -Location of Electric Meter Pedestals Rick Pylman stated that there is an issue with the gang electric meter pedestal at the Alpines at Eaglebend. Pylman stated that he thought Jeff Spanel was going to be at this meeting to request permission to leave the pedestal. Pylman stated that he would work on that in the next two weeks and come to some resolution to the issue. Other Business (cont) Jack Hunn stated that Lot 103, Block 1, Wildridge has been completely stripped, corner to corner. He stated that he is not aware of any approved building plans for this lot. Pylman stated that they would follow up on this. Jack Hunn stated one other thing, as part of the water pump station construction near the fire station, the adjacent lot is being used to store things. He asked if it was possible, after this construction, to get the lot reveged. Also, Jack Hunn mentioned the fence that is broken down where all the CME vans are stored and this needs to be taken care of. Discussion followed on the rock retaining walls on Lot 95, Block 1, Wildridge. Pylman stated that they would follow up on all these comments. Rhoda Schneiderman commented, regarding Terry Allen, that he has until August 1st to finish. He has done nothing for the last week. Rhoda Schneiderman moved to adjourn. Buz Reynolds seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 9:55 PM. Respectfully submitted, r. Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary •) C7 • w PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 15,1993 Page 13 Commission J. Perkins S. Railton R. Schneid A. Reynolds P. Dixon H. Vest J. H nnu Date 6 3