Loading...
PZC Packet 060788STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 6/7/88 Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar Sign Variance INTRODUCTION: L.A.L., Inc., dba Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar is requesting a variance to hang a banner advertising that the restaurant is now serving breakfast. The applicant is requesting permission to display the banner from 7AM to 11AM each morning, seven days a week. The banner is 2' x 26' with black letter on a white background and will have a fixed location on the southwest facing framework of the sundeck. STAFF COMMENTS: Section 15.2£.020 - 27 gives the definition of a temporary sign as: Any sign, banner, pennant, or other device that directs persons to a special event, location, or offering that is not permanent in nature. Section 51.28.080 - M. Permits temporary signs, but the must be limited to a maximum size of thirty five square feet and not to be in place for more than one week per event. Also, the sign may only be displayed for only one event in any thirty day period. The proposed banner meets the new sign code ordinance size requirements, but requires a variance for the length of time requested to be displayed. The following variance procedure is required: Section 15.26.090 - B 2. Approval Criteria: Before acting on a variance reauest, the planning and zoning commission shall consider the following factors: a. The relationship of the requested variance to existing and potential uses and structures in the vicinity; b. The degree to which relief from the strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of a specified regulation is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity; c. Such other factors and criteria as the commission deems applicable to the requested variance. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission - 6/7/88 Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar Sign Variance Page 2 of 3 3. Findings Required. The planning and zoning commission shall make the following . findings before granting a variance: a. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privileqe inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity; b. That the variance is warranted for one or more of the following reasons: i. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; ii. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity; iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the vicinity. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Should the Commission decide to grant a variance for the banner, the approval should be limited to a specific time frame such as until September 30, 1988. This would allow the use through Labor Day and allow the Commission to re-evaluate the banner at that time. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Introduce Project; 2. Presentation by Applicant; 3. Commission Review of Submitted Materials; 4. Act on Application. pully submitted, Joseph McGrath Building Inspector Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission - 6/7/88 Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restaurant and Bar Sign Variance Page 3 of 3 PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Date N imX -{ 1�-1-A?5 Denise Hill, Secretary A.1}=FYLJ' The Co4ission granted approval of this application citing Section 15.28.90 -B -3,b, ii: There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply to other properties in the vicinity; Display of the sign shall be limited to the hours of 7AM to 11AM and shall be allowed until September 30, 1988. e`) STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 6/7/88 Lot 1, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Coastal Mart, Inc. (Derby Station) Sign Variance Design Review INTRODUCTION: Coastal Mart, Inc. is applying for design review for changes to the signs on the existing Derby Station. One of the proposed signs would replace the existing PD Quick, pan channel type sign on top of the building. The existing approved sign was to have an area of 10.5 square feet. The replacement would be an interior -lit box -type plastic sign. No plans or dimensions were received with the application, but judging from the photographs provided, the replacement sign is considerably larger. The second request is to replace the front section of the illuminated facia over the front door vestibule with a little different design. The third request is to replace the existing facing on the 30 foot freestanding I.D. sign. STAFF COMMENTS: In reviewing the proposed building sign and ccmparing it with the existing sign and the Avon Sign Code, there appears to be discrepancies. Section 15.28.060 discourages the use of interior -lit box -type plastic signs. The Section goes on to say that the Board might consider the box -type sign if it is appropriate with the location. Another concern is the difference in illumination that will be coming off the new building sign. Section 15.28.060 G states that "Lighting should be of no greater wattage than is necessary to make the sign visible at night, and should not reflect unnecessarily onto adjacent properties". Both signs have a considerable white colored area that will probably be considerably brighter than the existing signs. One alternative would be to reduce the wattage of the illumination to provide a level of light similar to the existing signs. The second request of replacing the existing illuminated facia with a similar design makes no difference. This opinion is based strictly on the photograph provided and assumes the illumination level will be the same and the size of the facia will remain the same. The third request for replacement of the facings on the 30 foot freestanding I.D. sign brings some considerations. The existing Derby logo is surrounded by a dark colored border. Below this section is a white area that is broken up by colored credit card examples. The proposed sign having the large white area with only the logo to break up the back lighting will produce a brighter illumination. Again, one alternative might be to lower the wattage to provide a light level consistent with the existing sign face. Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 1, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Coastal Mart, Inc. (Derby Station) Sign Variance Design Review Page 2 of 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff offers the following items to be considered as conditions to design review approval for this project: 1. If the Commission feels an interior -lit box -type sign is appropriate in this area, the approval for the building sign is contingent upon the sign being no larger than 10.5 square feet and illumination level be reduced to a level consistent with existing sign. 2. Proposed facia shall not exceed size or illumination levels of existing facia. 3. Illumination level shall be reduced in freestanding sign to maintain light output consistent with existing sign face. The above conditions should maintain signage within the previously approved sign program variance. Any increase in sign area or lighting levels should be considered as a modification to the existing variance and would require following the procedure for granting of a variance. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: 1. Introduce Project; 2. Presentation By Applicant; 3. Commission Review of Submitted Materials; 4. Act on Application. spe tfully submitted, Joseph McGrath Building Inspector 00�n Staff Report to Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 1, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Coastal Mart, Inc., (Derby Station) Sign Variance Design Review Page 3 of 3 PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as Submitted ( Approved with Recommended Conditions Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied r- .1 AA se Withdrawn ( ) The Commission approved the requested sign changes for Lot 1, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Coastal Mart with the staff recommendations: 1. The approval is contigent upon the sign being no larger than 10.5 square feet and illumination level be reduced to a level consistent with existing sign. 2. Proposed facia shall not exceed size or illumination levels of existing facia. 3. Illumination level shall be reduced in freestanding sign to maintain light output consistent with existing sign face. r3 STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 6/7/88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek 51 Beaver Creel: Place Design Review INTRODUCTION• Morter Architects presented preliminary plans for a 7000 square foot retail/commercial center on Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the May 17, 1988 meeting. The proposed project generally consisted of a single story masonry building with standing seam metal roof, covered walkway along front and surface parking. Exterior finish materials include high glass paint on 8" by B" scored concrete block and stucco. Following review of the proposed project, the Commission gave preliminary design review approval subject to: 1. Final design include a fully dimensioned site plan conforming with building setback requirements, parking and access, loading dock requirements and pedestrian circulation. 2. Final design include complete grading and drainage plan addressing detention and treatment of parking lot r4 off. 3. Final design include a Comprehensive Sign Program detailing sizes, locations and materials for all signage for the project. 4. Final design conform with requirements of the Zoning Code, Planning and Zoning Commission Design Procedures, Rules and Regulations. The Applicant has submitted revised plans for Final Design Review approval. These plans show the following: Lot Area: 0.59 Acres 25,596 square feet Zone District: SC (Shopping Center) Proposed Use: Retail/Commercial Building Area Allowed: 50% 12,798 square feet Building Area Proposed: 32% 8,271 square feet Building Height Allowed: 60 feet Building Height Proposed: 31 feet Gross Floor Area Proposed: 7,000 square feet Minimum Parking Required: 4/1000 square feet - 28 spaces Parking Proposed: 28 spaces Minimum Loading Spaces Required: 1 - 12 feet x 35 feet Loading Spaces Proposed: 1 - 12 feet r, 35 feet Minimum Snow Storage Required: 2392 square feet Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek 51 Beaver Creek Place Design Review Page 2 of 7 Snow Storage Proposed: 2482 square feet Minimum Usable Open Space Required: 5119 square feet Useable Open Space Proposed: 5693 square feet Maximum Impervious Open Space Allowed: 2560 square feet Impervious Open Space Proposed: 1588 square feet Front Lot Setback - beaver Creek Place: 25 feet Proposed Setback: 49.5 feet Front Lot Setback, - Beaver Creek Blvd.: 25 feet Proposed Setback: 25 feet Side Lot Setback - West: 7.5 feet Proposed Setback: 7.75 feet Side Lot Setback - South: 7.5 feet Proposed Setback: 13.33 feet Parking Lot Setback: 7.5 feet per variance approved at May 17, 1988 meeting. The revised Flans include grading and drainage details providing for detention and treatment of parking lot runoff as well as additional details for sign program. In general, the proposed sign program allows 12 square feet of signage for each individual business and includes a four sided 20 foot high, freestanding project identification sign with 16 square feet of sign area per side. Signs are to consist of cast aluminum letters with baked enamel finish fastened to painted steel mesh and will be located over entry to each business. Individual business signs will have white letter -i and project identification sign will have red letters. Steel mesh background will be dart: grey. Signs will be front lit from under roof. Maximum letter size will be 18 inches high. STAFF COMMENTS: The revised plans appear to be in general conformance with the zoning regulations of the Town. The following comments are design related issues: A. Grading and Drainage Plan 1. Details are not clear regarding curb section along street and at entrances. These areas should have concrete curb and gutter sections. Asphalt curb in these areas is not acceptable. 2. Curb section or landscaping should be extended into parking lot at entrance from beaver Creek Place to maintain separation between parking and driveway areas. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek 51 Beaver Creek Place Design Review Page 3 of 7 3. Construction plans should address sidewalk crossing of drainage swale and curb section at southeasterly corner of site. 4. Drainage Swale at entrance to Commercial Federal driveway culvert should be rack lined for erosion control. B. Development Plan 1. Proposed site lighting consists of JO watt high pressure sodium down light fixtures. Two double fixtures will be located along Beaver Creel; Place at a mounting height of approximately 14 feet and two single fixtures will be mounted on the proposed sign tower. Sufficient information has not been provided to evaluate light pattern, but it appears the northwesterly corner of the site and the entrance from Beaver Creek Blvd. will have inadequate coverage. With relatively low wattage of the proposed fixtures, it is also possible that inadequate light levels will be maintained along Beaver Creek Place and especially at the entrance. C. Landscape Plan 1. Loading space has been moved forward toward Beaver Creek Place. Landscaping and grading details are not shown for this area. Significant landscaping in this area could provide screening for the trash enclosure and loading area. 2. Details have not been provided for trash enclosure. D. Elevations 1. Color rendering has not been provided at this time. Color rendering should clearly define areas of color for the samples included on color board. E. Sign Program 1. Proposed 12 square feet sign area per individual business may not be consistent with proposed 18 Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Crekk. 51 Beaver Creek Place Design Review Page 4 of 7 inch letters. This:, would limit sign=_ to approximately 5 letters per sign. Current sign code allows up to 20 square feet per individual business. It may be appropriate to allow individual businesses up to 20 square feet of sign area with a maximum letter size of 18 inches. 2. Current regulations limit freestanding signs to total area of 40 square feet with a maximum height of 8 feet. The Commission then has discretionary powers to approve freestanding signs with a total area of 64 square feet and a maximum height of 20 feet. The proposed sign program stipulates a sign area of 16 square feet per side or under current regulations a total area of 32 square feet. However, the actual sign area may be as large a 112 square feet per side or 224 square feet if the Commission includes the supporting structure in the allowable sign area as provided in the definition a+ freestanding sign. This definition reads: Section 15.28.020 (14) "Sign, freestanding" means a single or multi -Faced sign affixed to a supporting structure, or embedded in and extending from the ground, or detached from the building. Allowable size may include supporting structure. If the supporting structure is excluded from the allowable sign area calculations and the area of the mesh background is counted as sign area, the total sign area would be approximately 36 square feet per side. The proposed 18 inch letters will require approximately 40 square feet o+ area per side for the proposed wording "51 BEAVER CREEK PLACE". 1. The proposed location of the freestanding sign encroaches into the 10 foot setback stipulated in subsection 15.28.080 (P) a+ the sign code. If the freestanding sign is approved as proposed, the Commission must fallow the provisions for the granting of a variance including the required findings: a. That the granting a+ the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity; b. That the variance is warranted For one or more a+ the +allowing reasons: i. The strict or literal Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7./88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark. at Beaver Creek 51 Beaver Creek Place Design Review Page 5 of 7 interpretation and enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title. ii. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the vicinity: iii. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by owners of other properties in the vicinity. It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide the Commission with adequate information to make the above findings. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS_ Staff recommends final design review approval of the proposed 51 Beaver Creek Place, subject to the following conditions: 1. Construction plans include concrete curb and gutter details for all deisgnated areas within public right-of-way and at entrances. Plans shall be subject to approval by Town Engineer prior to start of construction. 2. Concrete curb section and landscaping extend in to parking lot at Beaver Creek Place entrance to define separation between parking area and driveway. Construction plans include details for sidewalk crossing of curb and drainage Swale at southeasterly corner of lot. Details shall be subject to approval by Town Engineer. 4. Regraded drainage swale at entrance to Commercial Federal driveway culvert be rock lined for erosion control. 5. Additional information be provided regarding site lighting and additional lighting be provided as necessar/ to provide minimum light levels at entrances and parking areas. Acceptable light coverage to be approved by Tcwn E,igineer unless Commission approval is requested by Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission Staff Report to the Planning :nd Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek 51 Beaver Creel: Place Design Review Page 6 of 7 applicant. 6. Landscaping to be expanded to include southwesterly corner of site to provide screening for loading space and trash dumpster. 7. Submission of plans for enclosure of trash dumpster for approval by Commission. 8. Specific location of various colors be identified on building elevations. 9. Sign program be modified to allow up to 20 square feet of sign area per individual business with a maximum letter size of 18 inches. 10. The freestanding sign should be considered as a separate item in the review process: a. First the Commission should determine whether special consideration shall be given for the sign height and size in accordance with the revised sign code. b. Second, the Commission should consider the required findings for granting of a variance from the 10 foot setback requirement. C. If the Commission does not make the appropriate determinations and findings for the proposed freestanding sign and variance, it should be excluded from the design review approval. If the Commission does make the appropriate determination and findings to approve the proposed freestanding sign and required variance, Staff recommends the following condition: i. Letter size be reduced such that actual sign area will not exceed 32 square feet per side when calculated in accordance with adopted sign code. Staff Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission 6/7/88 Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek 51 Beaver Creek Place Design Review Page 7 of 7 RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Project; 2. Presentation by Applicant; 3. Staff Comments; 4. Freestanding Sign Determination and Findings for Variance; 5. Design Review Action. Respectfully submitted, Norman ood Director of Engineering and Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION; i Approved as Submitted ((-) Approved with Recommended Conditions (w) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) The Commission granted final design approval for Lot 69, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, 51 Beaver Creek Place, with the conditions that the Applicant work with the Staff in addressing all the Staff recommendations and that the Applicant return at a later date with a sign program, including the free- standing sign To: Town of Avon From: JF Lamont RE:Project Review: Date: June 3, 1988 Project: Beaver Creek Place Note: asterisk indicates comments changes from April 27, 1988 review memorandum. The following Design Guidelines have been reviewed and are offered for consideration by the reviewing authorities and the applicant. The recommendations made in this report are subject to change; upon the submission of additional information, the content of the public hearings, and the results of additional research. Section 6.00 Design Guidelines: 6.10 Design Review Considerations: The Commission shall consider the following items in reviewing the design of a proposed project: 6.11 The conformance with the Zoning Code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. Comment: See Staff Report 6.12 The suitability of the improvement, including type and quality of materials of which it is to be constructed and the site upon which it is to be located. Comment: 1. The suitability of the improvement is consistent with the existing development in Development District One. 2. The type and quality of materials is the same as or exceeds the type and quality of materials used in the construction of other structures in the vicinity. 3. *The size of the structure exceeds the ability of the site to accommodate required setbacks and site improvements. Pedestrian arcade is narrow. Variance from front setback causes public sidewalks to be impractical along street. Arcade circulation corridors should have unobstructed circulation corridor of 8-0." Architectural drawings fail to dimension unobstructed corridor width. page two 4. * Parking spaces fall short of optimum design due to filter gallery design. Problem resolved. 5. *Driveways are more narrow than a)propriate. Problem resolved. 6. *Turning radii in parking lot is inadequate. Unresolved. 7. *Improvements are located in public right-of-ways. Need variance for tower sign location. 8. *Pedestrian access through and across the site is undefined or inadequate. Partially separated pedestrian sidewalk has been provided linking arcade with street. Information is inadequate to determine if pedestrian access along south side of building has been resolved. 9. *Site and building lighting is insufficiently addressed. Request parking lot lighting be relocated, additional information to be supplied by architect. 10. *Insufficient information exist to determine landscape material and location. Landscaping plan appears adequate, additional information to be submitted on landscape lighting by architect. Insufficient information exists to determine if trash container and enclosure are adequate. 6.13 The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. Comment: 1. The design does not appear to adversely effect the distribution of light and air of adjacent properties. page three 2. *The access of Fire Safety equipment to adjacent properties may be adversely effected by the site design. Rear setback has been increased by 6 inches. 3. *Site drainage and landscape plans are of insufficient detail to determine their compatibility with existing or proposed site plan of adjacent properties. Major site drainage problems have been resolved. Asphalt curb in parking lot is prone to rapid deterioration, suggest concrete curbing. Due to manhole opening and traffic control sign in gutter line, curbing is proposed to be incomplete. Offset manhole assess behind curb or further into street. Relocate traffic control sign. Complete curbing so that project has finished appearance, conforms with goals and objectives, and meets standards required of other recent development in the vicinity. 4. Snow drop areas, collecting snow from pitched roof may adversely effect adjacent property as well as cause blocking of rear exits and delivery walkway. Similar problems exist on east side of building with snow dumping onto parked cars. Rear setback has been increased by 6 inches. Flat roof provided on east side of building to eliminate snow dump on adjacent parking spaces. Cupolas protect pedestrian access to building 5. *Insufficient interconnection of pedestrian circulation with adjacent properties. Due to design of drainage system proper interconnection of pedestrian circulation with adjacent properties to the south is not possible. Suggest that large circulation pad be located at terminus of sidewalk with street. 6. *Insufficient interconnection with common driveways on adjacent properties. Insufficient information to determine if interconnection can be accomplished in future. 7. *Insufficient interconnection of drainways with adjacent properties. Problem resolved. page four 8. *Insufficient interconnection with landscaping on adjacent properties. No additional information provided. Problem unresolved. 6.14 The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography. Comment: 1. *Curb, gutter and drainpans should included around the perimeter of the site. Complete curbing requested. 2. *Insufficient information exists to determine if on- site drainways are adequate to eliminate flooding on-site or on adjacent properties. Problems resolved. 6.15 The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. Comment: 1. *The visual appearance of the proposed improvement does not inhibit principal views nor block the solar exposure of adjacent and neighboring properties. Architectural design is compatible with building in the vicinity. 2. *Insufficient information exists to determine if landscaping will have an acceptable visual appearance from the public ways. Landscaping appears to be sufficient. It is suggested that flower beds be provided in east property line setback areas. 3. Exterior and unenclosed parking areas are not located in principal views from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. 4. *Insufficient information exists to determine if building and parking lot lights will impair neighboring property. Problem resolved. page five 6.16 The objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired. Comment: 1. The apparent mass of the one story pitched roof structuYe is consistent with one, two and three story structures on adjacent properties. 2. Building offsets are significant enough to be similar in appearance of structure on adjacent properties. 3. The buildings exterior materials, architectural detailing complements and enhances the standard of design for the vicinity. 4. *Provision should be made for adequate fire safety access to adjacent properties. Rear setback increased by 6 inches. 5. *Landscape improvements should be qualitatively and quantitatively increased so as to maintain or exceed the standards consistent with existing improvements in the vicinity. With the completion of perimeter curbing along street, the replacement of asphaltic curbing with concrete, and the addition of flower bed the proposed project will maintain standards consistent with recent improvements in the vicinity. 6. No information or standards are presently available which indicates that either the proposed use nor the aesthetics of the improvement are so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired. 6.17 The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. Comment: The proposed project is in substantial compliance with the adopted development goals, policies, and programs of the Town of Avon. The appropriate goals, policies, and programs for the Town of Avon are as follows: ( The Development District 1 goals and policies have been excerpted from the Town's Goals and Policy statement and are included for benefits of the new member.) (see April 27, 1988 memo) -d1S ^ .0 , STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 6/7/88 Lot 10, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision Gosshawk Townhomes Television Antenna Location Change Request INTRODUCTION: At the regular meeting, May 17, 1938, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted approval for a television antenna to be mounted on the exterior of Unit 6 of Gosshawk Townhomes, Lot 10, Block 5, Wildridge Subdivision. Circuit Doctors, Inc., representing Bolduc Realty and Management, is requesting a change in the location of the antenna from the exterior of Unit 6 to the exterior of Unit 10, as shown on the attached site plan. The applicant feels this would be the best location for the tower aesthetically. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1. Introduce Project; 2. Commission Review of Submitted Material; 3. Act on Application. Respectfully submitted, Norman ood Director of Engineering and Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions ( ) Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( )r Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) The Commission granted approval of the Aoplicant's request to relocate the Television Antenna from Unit 6 to Unit 10 on Lot 10, Block 5, Wildridge. STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION - 6/7/88 Lot 6, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Balas Condominiums East Color Change Request Design Review INTRODUCTION: William Nolan, of Perpetual Care, managers of Balas Condominiums East, Lot 6, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, is requesting approval of a color change for the exterior of the project. At present the project is stained a Naturaltone Cedar. The requested color change is to a solid color stain called Stonehedge Gray. STAFF COMMENTS: The Planning and Zoning Commission should take into consideration whether the color change is appropriate for the building design and the area. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Introduce the Application; 2. Commission Review of the Application; 3. Act on the Application. Res pectf lly submitted, 10�n ,food Director of Engineering and Community Development PLANNING AND ZONING ACTION: Approved as Submitted ( ) Approved with Recommended Conditions Approved with Modified Conditions ( ) Continued ( ) Denied ( ) Withdrawn ( ) Benchmark at Beaver Creek, Balas Condominiums East with the condition that the Applicant return in two weeks and present a proposed color for the trim.