PZC Minutes 020194RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
A Planning and Zoning Commission Worksession was held at 6 P.M. Topic of discussion was
the duplex definition and duplex connections. The consensus of the Commission was not to
allow detached duplexes, even on steep slopes. The Commission felt that there should be a
strong physical connection, in keeping with the definition of duplexes and that such connection
should be a strong architectural form.
The regular meeting of the Pianning and Zoning Commission was held on February I, 1994,
in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road,
Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order at 7:40 P.M. by Chairman John Perkins.
Members Present: John Perkins, Jack Hunn,
Buz Reynolds Sue Railton
Rhoda Schneiderman, Hemy Vest
Staff Present: Steve Amsbaugh, Direcior of
Community Development,
Mary Bolden, "Lown Planner,
Charlette Pascuui, Recording
Secretary
All members were present at the worksession except Henry Vest and Patti Dixon. Henry V.sst
arrived at 7 30 P.M , in time for the regular meeting. Patti Dixon was absent.
Steve Amsbaugh stated that the applicant for Agenda Item number 4, Lot 42, Block I, Wildridge,
has requested this be tabled once again and also the applicant for Agenda Item number 7, Lot 24,
Block 3, Wildridge, be removed from the Agenda until the next meeting
E;z
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 2
Lot 82, Block -I Wildridge Subdivision. McComic: fourplex. Final Design Review
Mary Holden stated that the building is three levels. Building height is approximately 35' in height.
Primary material is stucco, wHch will be a warm gray, with siding as an accent, with a cedar shake
shingle roof. Landscaping consists of aspens, spruce, and shrubs. Holden stated that Staff
comments are
1. All easements, setbacks and true limits -of disturbance need to be shown on the building permit
application.
2. A culvert needs to be added underneath the driveway at the entrance.
3. The retaining wall needs to be taken out of the setback or a variance applied for.
4. Landscaping needs to located out of the snow storage.
5. The type of fireplaces need to be indicated. Only gas or certified solid fuel devices are allowed.
6. Building lighting needs to be approved by Staff prior to issuance of building permit.
7. All flues, flashings and vents be painted to match the color of the building or a flat dark color.
8. The meters be located on the building.
Duane Piper stated that the site is about one and a quarter acres. The contours follow a ravine and
face towards the south, southwest. The site is relatively steep, but there is a reasonable shelf that is
on the upper portion of the site. Three units are about 1300 square feet and one is about 1450
square feet. The units parallel the contours and also stagger, because in the same direction of the
contours is a very good view. This also allows a reasonably good breakup of the massing. While
they have a stagger, what he has elected to do with the two middle units is have the roof span over
both units in one element, so what you have is a short roof, a long roof, and a short roof as opposed
to four broken up roofs. It also allows a larger overhang in one particular portion. This will allow
protection to some of the entrys. One thing that allows a bit more interest is that the south unit is
slightly larger. The materials are mostly monolithic, being stucco in just a warn gray color, but they
have tried to accent with the other colors provided. The windows will be a light sage green and the
pipe railing would be a slightly darker sage color. There is also a play of colors in the gray. The
garage doors are actually a tone darker than the stucco. There is a band that goes around the top that
will be wood siding, a I x 8 channel rustic cedar and would be done in an Olympic 911, which would
come off slightly lighter than the stucco. So, there are three tones of the warm gray. In the
landscaping, they are trying to frame and soften the ends and give some introduction from the
PO4
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 3
Lot 82, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision, McComic Fourplex. Final Design Review (cont)
roadway that comes down to the four units. One thing that came up at conceptual review was the
downhill elevation to the west is about, at its most severe point, about 4 feet taller working from a
point at the north end. It was asked if he would consider wood siding on that end. He stated that he
would prefer to keep a rather monolithic approach. What he did do was increase low, medium and
high shrub landscaping to the back side, so that it would be softened.
Chairman Perkins asked if the applicant had any problems with the Staff recommendations. Mr.
Piper stated that he had no problems. The only one that stood out was the retaining wall. He
thought a boulder gravity wall could encroach into the setback. He does not think it will be a
problem moving it out of the setback. He stated that he could comply with the recommendations at
building permit submittal. Mary Holden stated that the lighting needs to be approved prior to
submittal. Perkins asked about the site lighting. Piper stated that they would do is highlight the
driveway coming down and into the boulder retainage with low landscape lighting. Then each unit
would have a light immediate to their entrance. Rhoda Schneiderman asked if the building lighting
would be master controlled. Will it be on all night? Piper stated that it would be individually
controlled. Schneiderman asked if there would be anything over the garage doors that stays on.
Piper stated that they would master to one meter the site lighting, but the lighting to the units would
be per unit. Perkins asked if it would be a soffit light. The applicant stated it would be.
Discussion followed on the reason for the use of landscaping on the west end, rather than adding
siding.
Jack Hunn stated that the staff report states : , iximately 35"' and he asked if the project would
have to meet a 35' maximum. Mary Holden stated it would. Hunn also asked Ms. Holden to clarify
:he wood burning fireplace regulations. Holden stated that wood burning, like an open hearth
fireplace, is allowed in Wildridge in single family or duplex units, with a fee of $1,500.00. Anything
three units or more are not allowed to have an open hearth. They can have gas or certified fuel.
Hunn asked if there would be a project sign. The applicant stated that there would not be a sign.
Hunn stated that the deck on the northeast corner of the northern unit that appears to cantilever
towards the east, but does not turn the corner and there are no columns to support it. The applicant
stated that would be done by brackets. Hunn asked if there was a reason that they do not want to
wrap that corner and return it to the chimney element. The applicant stated that they could probably
could still get a column in the comer that would be clear of the garage and accomplish that very
thing. Hunn stated that the unit on the opposite side of the building has a deck that wraps the corner
and it is a very attractive feature and he thinks that this corner, being closest to the road, and a first
impression, would benefit from wrapping the comer. The applicant stated that he would not have
any difficulty with that. He had originally designed it that way. Hunn asked if the landscaping
was supported by an automatic irrigation system. The applicant stated it was not.
A
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 4
Lot 82. Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision McComic Fouiplex, Final Design Review (cont)
He stated that they hoped to, through property management, get it started and then not use as much
irrigation. Hunn stated that in the past they have given that latitude to single family residences and
even duplex developments, but with multi -family, they encourage an automatic system so that it
takes the opportunity for failure eway from it. Since some of the aspects of this project relies on
landscaping to soften =t and that landscaping fails it would be detrimental to the project. The
applicant stated he t!unks it is a good point. Hunn stated that the proposed landscaping, for four
units seems to be a little light, but the site is limited for embellishment. He would feel better about it
if there was an automatic irrigation system. Hunn stated he thinks it is a good project.
Buz Reynolds asked about the sewer line disturbance, which will be considerable. He stated that he
thinks great care should be made in bringing back that scar. Reynolds asked it the lighting will go all
the way to the street. The applicant stated that the driveway lighting would probably reach the end
of the property, which would be about 15' off the cul -d -sac.
Henry Vest had no comments.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she would like it specified as to what type of revegetation would be
done. She stated that she does not think the landscaping is adequate for this building. It will
probably take five or six years for some of those five gallon shrubs to even reach three or four feet
high. She thinks that without water, they will not survive. She feels it is imperative that there is
some sort of drip system, r not a sprinkler system. She suggested using landscape to soften the
garages. The applicant stated there is not really any room to add islands.
Sue Railton stated that there is room there for people to put pots, etc.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she also thinks that the deck should wrap around.
Sue Railton stated that she likes the design. She stated that she thinks there has to be substantial
planting on the west elevation, even some aspen trees. She also recommended, strongly, that an
irrigation system be installed.
Chairman Perkins stated he concurs. The west side will be perceived as the back side and people will
not go around to water very often, therefore a need for an irrigation system. He also likes the
concept of wrapping that deck. The applicant stated that there had been discussions in design phase
of doing an automatic sprinkler system and it was just left as a consideration during the final
drawings. He thinks that should now be included. Also, he thinks the deck can wrap around.
Perkins asked about the revegetation of the sewer line. The applicant stated that they hope to replant
some of the sage that they disturb, along with the grasses.
tA►
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 5
Lot 82, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision, Final Design Review, cont
Jack Hunn moved to grant final design approval with the following conditions:
1. The deck on the northeast corner wrap around the corner.
2. The landscaping be supported by an automatic irrigation system.
3. The site dis.,:rbance, and specifically the sewer line, be revegetated to match the native grasses.
4. The meters be placed on the building.
5. The flues, flashings and vents be painted to match the color of the building or a flat dark color.
6. The landscaping he located out of the snow storage areas.
7. The exterior building lighting be approved by Staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.
8. A culvert be added to the driveway entrance.
9. All easements, setbacks, and true limits of site disturbance must be shown on the site plan
submitted for a building permit.
10. The boulder retaining wall be removed from the 10' setback easerient or a variance granted prior
to issuance of a building permit.
Henry Vest seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.
Lot 74. Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision. McComic Duplex. Final Desien Review
Mary Holden stated the duplex will be two levels and will have a detached garage. The primary
material for the garage and the duplex is stucco, red sandstone in color. The roof will be cedar shake
shingles. The landscape pian includes aspen and shrubs. Holden stated that true limits of site
disturbance needs to be shown on building permit plans. The Town Engineer wants the applicant to
be aware that drainage may occur into the duplex connector. The slope east of the duplex needs to
be 2:1 slope. The garage overhangs cannot be in the setbacks. Fireplaces need to be indicated,
The driveway at the road needs to be 4% for the first 20 feet and they are showing 6%. Also, the
Staff needs to review the building lighting prior to building permit issuance. Staff recommends
approval with the following conditions:
W\
Iti
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 6
Lot 74. Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision. McComic Duplex. Final Design Review (cont)
1. The meters be placed on the buildings.
2. The flues, flashings and vents be painted.
3. The building lighting he approved by Staff prior to the building permit.
4. All easements, setbacks, and true limits of site disturbance be shown on the site plan submitted for
a building permit.
5. The first 20 feet of the driveway must maintain a maximum of 4% slope.
Duane Piper stated that this is a site that has in its natural state about a 20% slope, but given the fact
that they have a cut and fill across the street, they end up, from road condition down on to the site,
with about 30%. What he has elected to do is come off of the driveway, cut traverse across the site
and terminate the vehicular access at that point. That still leaves the structure for the houses high on
the site. So what he has elected to do at that particular juncture is to detach the garage, which
would be a two car garage, one for each unit. He then stepped down an additional five feet to the
main level of the structures, which would be the upper level and then within the structure, you would
go down from that. This seemed to be a little bit better way to handle the site itself. The basic
concept was to come up with three simple pods that would be basically close to a square form, but
not quite. T lien to take the two residential units and juxtapose those at an angle that would be a little
bit more sensitive to the topography and allows the entrance to splay open and make more of a
welcoming statement. The units are a quite simple form and he has tried to pronounce that simplicity
by using primarily a stucco. He provided samples of the red sandstone and siding color which iE an
Olympic 908, kind of a blue green. The landscaping is fairly simple and surrounding the building
itself and framing the building. Some effort has been made to revegetate the downhill side of the
driveway, which would be totally regraded and totally disturbed. Regarding the Commission's
comments at conceptual design review about the windows, they have elected to raise the walls or the
roof on the units and make that a nine foot eave instead of an eight foot. This allows the opportunity
to be a little bit more interesting in creating windows and their treatment. They have elected to do
with a nine foot wall is to choose an eight foot header height which allows a bit more interest in how
the windows are done. Because one unit has a little bit different positioning, relative to the garage
and site, they have changed the windows from one unit to the other on the front and back entirely.
Buz Reynolds if the color sample was close to what it would look like on the stucco. The applicant
stated that the sample is a bit darker than it will be on the stucco. Reynolds asked about the finish of
the stucco. The applicant stated it would be a very fine finish with a swirl.
004
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 7
Lot 74, Block I. Wildridge Subdivision, McComic Duplex Final Design Review, (cont)
Reynolds asked if the connections for the big shed would be big metal braces. The applicant stated
that the middle element of that will have rough cedar truss work. The brackets will be painted the
same color as the railings, the blue green color.
Jack Hunn asked what the soffit material would be. The applicant stated it would be T-111. Hunn
asked if they would do anything special on the seams. The applicant stated that they will be running
those on a stagger, so on some occasions you will see a butt, but given the fact that the bean; breaks
it up and then it comes into the housing. he doesn't think there is a joint longer than eight feet.
Hunn stated that he thinks the applicant has addressed the mirror image concern very adequately. He
is still concerned with the maneuvering space within the driveway. There isn't any dedicated area for
maneuvering and avoiding backing into the street. Mr. Piper stated that just beyond the two stalls
dotted in there is a space towards the drive for them to pull into that. It is a very tight site. As far as
the two stalls, he thinks they can actually back across the apron and turn out. Hunn asked how Staff
feels about a driveway width of what appears to be ten foot. Steve Amsbaugh stated that they will
check with the Town Engineer regarding this. Hunn stated that the ten foot width, quite often gets
narrower with snow accumulation. Hunn stated that the garage elevations that are most prominent
to the roadway are windowless, and doesn't have a lot of interest. It is all one material. Did you
give some consideration to adding some small windows to add interest. Mr. Piper stated that he has
never ever put a window in a garage in his life. He stated that what he was really after was a very
simple statement with a garage and to try to lead on beyond that to the other two units. Hunn stated
that the other way to mitigate that would be with some landscaping. He stated that he doesn't see
any landscaping proposed to help soften that corner. The applicant stated that he had two concerns
regarding that and they were that the driveway had to come down in order to create the two extra
spots and the other was that was the snow storage area and so he was keeping the vegetation out of
it, but if indeed they had aspens up against the side it would tend to break that up. Hunn stated that
the introduction of aspens in that area would probably be the better solution.
Henry Vest stated that he would agree that a window would help in the garage, not for the
appearance, but so you could see what you are doing when you walk into the garage. He asked what
the dimensions of the garage were. The applicant stated he believes it is 22 x 24. Vest questioned
the sizes of the windows in the living room. The applicant stated that the living room to the east unit
on the north elevation would be overall six feet by six feet, with a header height of eight. The other
side is affixed over an awning ihree feet by six feet. Vest stated that on the end elevation it shows
two french doors. The applicant stated that there are two french doors but only one is active. He is
just trying to get the continuity of all of it being french doors across the spread. Discussion followed
on the shade of the red sandstone color to be used. Vest thought it was pretty dark for the mass of
the buildings.
WR
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 8
Lot 74, Block I. Wildridge Subdivision McComic Duplex, Final Design Review. (cont)
Rhoda Schneiderman stated that the color is gradually growing on her. She stated that she thinks
this building would look much better in a redwood siding. She thinks that they need to put at least
three aspens, if not four or five on the garage side. She thinks the windows look fine.
Sue Railton stated that she Hkes the colors. She also thinks that some trees need to be added to the
garage to soften it. She would like to see a better solution to the parking and turnaround area.
Chairman Perkins stated that the consensus was that at least three to five aspens need to be added to
the garage side. Staff can check off on those. He stated that he likes the design. He was
uncomfortable with the wing that connects it. He stated that he likes the stucco and also the color.
Jack Hunn asked what the landscape finish would be below the entry connecting element. The
applicant stated that they have simply come to the face of that deck and shown shrubbery to mask it
a little bit. Hunn asked about using gravel there. The applicant stated that they were thinking about
using a redwood bark underneath there.
Rhoda Schneiderman felt that they could grow quite a bit down there, because of the natural
drainage and the shade.
Sue Railton moved to grant final design review approval with the following conditions:
1. The meters be placed on the building.
2. The flues, flashings, and vents be painted to match the color of the building or a flat dark color.
3. The building lighting be approved by Staff prior to issuance of a building permit.
4. All easements, setbacks, and true limits of site disturbance must be shown on the site plan
submitted for a building permit.
5. The first 20 feet of the driveway must maintain a maximum of 4% slope.
6. Three aspen trees be added to landscape around the garage.
Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried with a five to one vote, Henry Vest voting nay.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 9
Lot 97, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision. Romanelli duplex. Conceptual Design Review
Mary Holden stated Lot 97 has slopes ranging from 16 to 22%. The proposal is for a two to two
and one half story duplex that will be made of concrete, utilizing a gunite process, with a metal roof
which will be painted golden rod. Holden stated that Staff would like detail on all the retaining walls
on the site. Also a complete grading plan and certified topo of the site. The driveway grade exceeds
the Town of Avon standards, at 11%. The building is abutting the setbacks and overhangs are not
allowed in the setbacks. The building height may be over 35', but no scale was provided on the
elevation submitted. Also on the grading plan, true limits of site disturbance must be shown.
Regarding the materials, concrete is allowed, but with specific approval of the Planning and Zoning
Commission. As far as the metal roof, the design guidelines, rules and regulations state that large
expanses of bright reflective materials will not be acceptable. As a conceptual, there is no Staff
recommendation at this time.
Mr. Romanelli state that their concerns at this point are the concrete and the roof. Fie just got back
in town and he cannot answer the comments on the driveway grade, etc. He stated that as far as he
knows there are no roof overhangs. What abuts is a flat roof. The retaining walls would be at most
about a foot high and he would avoid them if he could. He described how the concrete walls would
be done. They will look like stucco. He stated that there are two roofs on one side and one on the
other that are metal and the €est are flat. He didn't feel that was a big expanse. They will be a
goldenrod color which would not be very reflective. They are looking at the economics of building it
this way, but if they cannot go with the concrete it would be a regular frame with stucco.
Sue Railton stated that she finds the building a little imposing for the lot. Going from setback to
setback with no relief is really pushing the limits on the lot. She certainly does not like the thought
of a metal roof on this type of building. In that location in Wildridge, the Commission would not
consider a metal roof at all.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she thinks it is a beautiful house. The tall stack like chimneys
bother her. She asked what going to the setbacks would do to adjacent projects. Mr. Romanelli
described where development would be on the adjoining projects. She stated that she would have to
see all four elevations in order to see what the rest of the roofing would be before making a
determination on the roofing material. She stated that a concrete tile roof would look good on this
building.
Henry Vest stated he thinks it is a pretty nice building He had concerns about the tall stack. He
asked what kind of deck it was that is over the entry. Would be there be any drip from the deck.
The applicant stated that it would be concrete. One of the reasons for the deck is to cover the
walkway. Vest stated that he would not be in favor of the metal roof.
r,
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 10
Lot 97. Block I. Wildridge Subdivision. Romanelli Duplex, Conceptual Design Review (cont)
Chairman Perkins stated he likes the perceived quality he sees in this concept. At the same time it is
an imposing building, but it may be far enough from the road that the perceived setback to setback
may not be as great as they think. He also thinks that with the quality of materials and design, a tiie
roof would be better than a metal roof. He stated that the applicant needs to provide all four
elevations, and the items mentioned by Mary Holden need to be addressed. He stated that he would
encourage the applicant to continue with the project.
Jack Hunn stated that he concurs with most of the comments. He thinks this can work with a
sensitive landscape solution. He would have a hard time supporting a metal roof on this, primarily
because of its location and reflectivity from this roof to other properties above it. He too would
encourage the applicant to go forward with this. It would be a good project for the subdivision.
Buz Reynolds asked how the concrete would be applied. The applicant stated it would be a sand
float. Reynolds stated that he thinks it will be smocther than the applicant thinks. Reynolds asked
what the parapets would be finished in. The applicant's response is not clear, as he was away from
the microphone. Reynolds stated that he would never give a positive vote for a metal roof in
Wildridge. He stated that he thinks the building is kind of exciting. Since they are using an awful lot
of the lot, the landscaping will have to be pretty substantial in order to break up the impervious
materials. That will be extremely important. He does not see how the 11% grade will work. the
applicant stated that this is the first he has know of that. Reynolds asked the applicant to provide a
sample of the concrete finish.
Chairman Perkins suggested that the applicant also provide a smaller scale site plan that could show
the development on adjacent lots so the Commission can get a feel of how this is going to work
between existing development, as far as the setbacks go.
Chairman Perkins stated that those were their comments. As a conceptual review, no action is taken
at this time.
Lot 38, Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision. Duplex Conceptual Design Review
Mary holden stated that the site is relatively flat. It has a seven percent slope. It will be two levels
and materials consist of cedar siding, stucco and gray asphalt shingles. A grading plan and certified
topo needs to be provided showing grades and true limits of site disturbance. Detail on the stone
walls which are located in the front and on the side yard setbacks needs to be provided. The stone
wall needs to be taken out of the setback or a variance applied for. Also there is a question if that is
a concrete driveway. If it is, an asphalt apron where it ties into the street needs to be provided. The
building orientation faces south. Staff would like the applicant to indicate the type of fireplace.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 11
Lot 38, Block I. Wildridge Subdivision, Duplex Conceptual Design Review cont
The building height is 35'. There are potential snow shedding problems in front of the garage. For
final design review, Staff would like the building materials and colors called out on the elevations.
As a conceptual review, there is no formal recommendation.
Michael Sanner described how they decided the location of the units on the property. He stated that
he would look at the retaining walls and see if they can just regrade it. Otherwise it is a pretty
straight forward stucco building that looks out towards the New York range and Beaver Crxk
views. The east unit, the garage, does have a secondary roof that wraps around back where the
meters will be hidden in a stone and roofed side vestibule. This will provide a secondary roof for
snow. They are not certain whether the drive will be concrete or asphalt, but they can provide an
asphalt apron.
Chairman Perkins stated that he is excited about the perceived quality of the proposed development.
He particularly likes the east and west elevations. He would like to see a little bit of work on the rear
elevation. It needs something.
Buz Reynolds asked if the vents would be just sticking out of the roof or will they be in chases. The
applicant stated that they had not thought about it. Reynolds stated that he would like to see them in
a chase. He stated that he likes the builJing. The one elevation in the rear does need more work.
Jack Hunn stated that he agrees. lie thinks it is a very attractive building, and creative use of the
site. The north elevation might be improved by introducing a second material, of some kind of a shift
in the east unit wall plane. This style of architecture relies on a pretty broad overhang and as they go
through final design and budgeting he would encourage them to try to salvage the broad overhang on
the building. It is an essential ingredient to the character of the house.
Chairman Perkins also suggested maybe some higher landscaping on the north side of the house
might help.
Henry Vest stated that he thinks it is an excellent use of the site.
Rhoda Schneiderman stated she likes the project. She stated that she would encourage them to use
the heaviest possible support beams for the roof features that they can find. She has a problem with
the caps on top of the stucco chimney. It seems to let the soot go down around the stucco. She
asked if they were wood burners. The applicant stated that they are gas.
Sue Railton stated that her only concern is the north elevation. Something needs to be done with
that.
F1
n
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 12
Lot 38, Block I. Wildrid re Subdivision. Duplex Conceptual Design Review. (cont)
Chairman Perkins stated that those are the Commission's comments. As a conceptual review, no
action would be taken at this time.
Tract G. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, Library, Discussion Item
Steve Amsbaugh stated that Pam Hopkins, the architect for the Library project, is present with an
update.
Ms. Hopkins provided more drawings of the project.
Buz Reynolds asked if they had any dealings with the people for the rec center yet. Ms. Hopkins
stated that she has see the mass model and the buildings seem to be quite compatible. She stated that
she is keeping a little abreast and she will pursue that more. John (Perkins stated that they would
encourage them to communicate with them with respect to the possibility of coordinating stone
materials, and possible colors, and site issues. Ms Hopkins stated that they have been in contact with
them regarding site issues.
Ms Hopkins stated that the first drawing shows the latest in where the building is located in
relationship to the new road location. There will be a little drop-off where the entry is. the next two
sheets are revised floor plans. the nest plan is the roof plan. The next pages are the elevations.
What they have come up with is the board and batten and stone and above that a linear element
which would be a board and batten every two feet, but then a horizontal in the middle in a rough
sawn material. They are overbuilding the roof over the meeting room to create a little half dormer
These same elements are just going around the building.
Buz Reynolds asked if the roof is staying at an 8:12 pitch. Ms. Hopkins stated that it is 3:12 and
8:12. Reynolds asked if they had looked into a non -sheen metal roof. She stated that they had not
yet. They are not quite at that level. They will be checking on it.
Chairman Perkins asked if the large rectangular mass on the west elevation was board and batten.
Ms. Hopkins stated that this war, glass block at the end of the stairwell. Perkins stated that the
proportion seems a little bit large. Ms Hopkins stated that they are sti'.l working on that element.
The computers are just in from the stairs and they do not want any direct light, thus the use of the
glass block, but they have not quite worked it out yet. Reynolds asked it there was any way to work
in a clad system to the block that would match the rest of the clad windows Ms. Hopkins stated that
they could look at that. Perkins asked if they had any idea of the color of the roof yet. Ms. Hopkins
stated that they did not know yet. Ms. Hopkins stated that their modified schtdule is that they will
submit in two weeks. Discussion follewed on where the pedestrian walkway wcuuld be.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 13
Tract G. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Library. Discussion Item. (cont)
Ms. Hopkins stated that what has been stalling them is the roadway, all the information and the
grading from the Engineer. This is taking a lot more time than anyone expected.
Jack Hunn stated that in the discussion on the rec center last week there was some discussion about
the architectural style difference and could they be compatible. The conclusion was that they could
be quite different, but it might benefit both projects if there was some similarities in the use of
materials and some strong opportunities to link the two in landscaping and pedestrian elements. Ms.
Hopkins stated that the rec center consultant is taking the lead and their consultant will have some
input into that mall area. Hunn stated that he thinks it is coming along nicely. He likes the skylights
and the ridge, and he likes what they have done to the dormer on the east side. He thinks that the
two elevations that face north and south are very attractive. He likes the use of materials. The
cantilevered element on the southwest corner is a nice feature. fie agrees that the glass block is
something that needs additional study.
Perkins asked what the spacing would be on the pole trusses on the interior. Ms. Hopkins stated that
it would be 21 feet, they span 42 feet.
Henry asked if the little dormer is board and batten. Ms, Hopkins stated it was.
Rhoda Schneiderman suggested a frosted window, rather the glass block.
Sue Railton stated that she likes the project. She stated she does not mind the glass block, but the
proportion needs work. Ms. Hopkins stated they were working on it.
Chairman Perkins asked if she needed any thing else from the Commission. Ms. Hopkins stated that
the comments were fine and thanked the Commission. She stated that she thinks she will submit in
two weeks.
Reading and Approval of the Jany -40L] 9 1994, Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes
Rhoda Schneiderman moved to approve the minutes of the Planning and Zoning Commission
January 18, 1994 meeting.
Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
February 1, 1994
Page 14
Other Business
Jack Hunn stated that the r—nmercial building that is being built, Valley Wide Plumbing, the color of
the stucco looks to be quite different than he thought was approved. Steve Amsbaugh stated that
Staff would check that out.
With no further business, Rhoda Schneiderman moved to adjourn, Buz Reynolds seconded. The
meeting was adjourned at 9:13 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
Charlette Pascuzzi
Recording Secretary
Commission Approval
J.
Dated f cf c