Loading...
PZC Minutes 100488RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES OF PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING OCTOBER 4, 1988 The regular meeting of the Planning and 'Zoning Commission was held on October 4, 1988, at 7:40 PM in the Town Council Chambers of the Town of Avon Municipal Complex, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Pat Cuny. Members Present: Tom Landauer, Frank Doll, Pat Cuny, Denise Hill Staff Present: Lynn Fritzlen, Director of Community Development; Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary, Joseph McGrath, Building Official Fri:zlen stated that Jeff Spanel and Mark Donaldson, on behalf of Eaglebend Partnership-Laukar Investments are requesting final design review for two proposed single family detached residences on a portion of Lot 1, Block 1, Filing No. 2, Eaglebend Subdivision. The residences are intended to be platted as townhouses and the remaining portion of the lot will be left for future development as yet unspecified. She indicted on the plans where the proposed units would be located. The two detached residences are on the western most end and the rest of the lot will be left for future development. She stated that the single family residences are mirror-image units. They are relatively small units, 1200 square feet total. Cuny asked if there were 32 development rights for the whole lot? Fritzlen stated that this was correct but they could not be fractionalized. Fritzlen stated that she had taken the Design Guidelines Considerations section by section as follows: 6.11 - Design consideration that the conformance with the zoning code and other applicable rules and regulations of the Town of Avon. She stated that the Planning and Zoning October 4, 1988 Page 2 of 19 Commission Meeting Minutes Lot 1 Block 1 Filing No 2 Eaglebend Subdivision Two application is complete and is in conformance with the applicable codes with the exception of the following: - Building location needs to be tied to lot lines - Material samples and exterior lighting proposals are to be shown at this meeting - she stated that the lighting location has been provided and lighting type has been provided, but it was after the staff report was prepared. - She stated that this property does side the railroad and staff feels that it would be in the best interest of safety to insure that the fence between the railroad and the proposed development be complete before the final certificate of occupancy is given to the developer. - Type of ownership should be platted before the final certificate of occupancy is issued. This insures things such as the water tap and sewer hookup so that the lines don't cross privately owned property and that they are properly placed in an easement. The lines have to come separately into individual units, they cannot be shared. 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. - Building type, materials are generally in neighborhood and the SPA plan. intended use and exterior conformance with surrounding - Landscaping proposed is nominal. It is primarily associated directly with the building, but it is adequate to soften the building edges. She expressed concern with screening from future development and from the open space. 6.13 - The compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. - The proposed design does not significantly impact adjacent properties. 6.14 - The compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography. Planning and Zoning October 4, 1988 Page 3 of 19 Commission Meeting Minutes Investments. Final Design Review (cont.) - The site topography is level and very buildable as well as accessible. 6.15 - The visual appearance of any proposed improvement as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. - The visual appearance is generally compatible with existing and proposed development. She stated again, that additional screening should be considered adjacent to the proposed deck for the purpose to provide privacy between residences, "open space" area, "future" development area and traffic on Eaglebend Drive. 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. - Proposal is generally compatible with, but not identical to any other development in the neighborhood, although the two units are identical. One of the things that offsets the symmetry and duplication of these two is that the site plan is not perfectly symmetrical and they are offset from each other and separated. 6.17 - The general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon. - The District Goals for Eaglebend Subdivision have not been adopted, but in the plat, they have platted densities and restrictions on height and setback, which this proposal does meet. Fritzlen stated that Staff recommends approval, conditioned by the following: Additional landscaping be incorporated on the east and west sides of the proposed residences to better screen residences and parking from adjacent development; Approval of exterior materials and lighting as presented at this meeting; The fencing between the railroad right-of-way and the rear of Lot 1 where the residences occur be complete before the certificate of occupancy is issued; that the proposed culvert length be adequate for drainage. Driveway should be constructed in accordance with the Town of Avon standard details, as per Norm Wood, Town Engineer, and that the building location be dimensioned before the building Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 4 of 19 permit is issued, it is not tied into the lot yet; That the proposed townhouse subdivision lines be the limits of construction, and that all disturbed areas be adequately reseeded with native grasses to match the existing; and the type of ownership be platted and recorded before the final certificate of occupancy is given. Jeff Spanel stated that he was representing the applicant. He stated that what they are trying to accomplish with this project is to basically split the townhouses into single family homes. Based on their preliminary work, they will probably be reducing the densities from 32 to 26 units. There will probably be two building plans, with mirror -images of each and maybe some variations on the roof themes to ge�ierate four to six or eight different exterior appearances. The intent is to provide a moderately priced home, about $125,000.00 for a single family home. The exterior materials will be either a cedar or construction grade redwood siding with a solid color stain. He provided samples of the colors, a heritage blue and a cape cod grey. He stated that they don't have a sample of the roofing material, but would like to use a synthetic wood, a fiberglass composition shingle that has the appearance of a wood shingle, but actually is going to give a superior roof at a lower cost. The brand name is a Timberline shingle. He stated that they had no problem with the staff comments, except for the Town requirement that the driveway width be 20 feet. Fritzlen stated that she had checked that out with the fire department and rechecked it with the engineer and we are not requiring a 16 foot driveway. Spanel stated that they intend to extend the existing fence, cleaning it up, painting it, and landscaping in front of it, down to approximately the west lot line of this property, but they want to phase the fence with the construction. The fence will be extended as far as the two houses go. Cuny asked what he thought about the additional landscaping to better screen the residences. Spanel asked what Fritzlen had in mind. One of the comments heard initially was maybe pulling the landscaping that has been suggested further away from the house. He stated that each house will be staggered and side yards will be created and they feel that they can provide the screenages Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 5 of 19 Lot 1 Block 1 Filing No 2 Eaglebend Subdivision, Two Single Family Residences Eaglebend Partnership-Laukar Investments Final Design Review (cont.) for each of the units. Cuny asked Fritzlen what she had in mind? Fritzlen stated that she felt it was something that is up to the Planning and Zoning Commission's discretion. It can be addressed at this stage or it can be addressed at the time the total development is built out. Spanel stated perhaps that should come in with the next unit as far as where that ends up being placed and how it will be screened from the existing deck on this unit. Fritzlen stated that when you have things developed in phases, it is often good to look ahead. Cuny stated that phases don't always work and each phase should stand on it's own. Spanel stated that the reason for only two units at this time is that they are sort of testing the water. He stated that one of the things that is a benefit of this project is promoting the idea of these being single family houses and for them to come in with the next phase that is going to be immediately adjacent to this with no landscaping between it and the deck on this house is contrary to what their goals are. They feel it is something they can address as we go. The other reason is that they intend to come up with at least one additional plan, that can be mirror -imaged, but they don't know what that next house will be at this point. Cuny asked if the staff had a chance to look at the lighting? Fritzlen stated that it wouldn't be a direct light source, it does have a shade to it, which is one of the criteria for exterior lighting and there is one light located on the side of the garage. The height called out on it is 6' 8". Cuny asked about the culvert length? Spanel stated that it would be adequate. Cuny asked if the building location would be dimensioned before the building permit. Spanel stated that this was no problem. Although these are Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 6 of 19 Lot 1 Block 1 Filing No 2 Eaglebend-Subdivision Two single families, there will be a townhouse association to take care of the concerns of common utilities. The property, when first platted in Eagle County was 9 duplex lots, and when they went through the annexation and rezoning through the Town, the existing lot lines were vacated and was zoned in bulk as a townhouse site. There are currently 9 taps that have been extended under the asphalt. They want to utilize those taps so they don't disturb the road, so they have to do a townhouse association to accomodate the requirements for water and sewer billing. It will be a minimal townhouse association, it will only address water and sewer billing and common driveways. Cuny asked about the ownership being platted and recorder before the final certificate of occupancy. Spanel replied, yes, this would be done. Cuny inquired if it had adequate parking? Fritzlen stated that there was adequate parking. She stated that the garage was only suitable for one space under our regulations and there are two additional parking spaces behind the building which allows two parking spaces per unit. One parking space outside and one inside. Hill asked if the basement will be finished? Spanel stated that the basement will have rough -in plumbing for a bathroom, but will be unfinished at this point. Doll asked how many bedrooms? Spanel stated there are two bedrooms finished. The windows on the lower level will be egress windows, there is a potential of either doing two bedrooms and a full bathroom downstairs or a bathroom bedroom and family room downstairs, what ever they want to finish it as. Doll asked if there were any fireplaces? Spanel stated that there is a fire place on the main living level. Cuny asked if there is irrigation for the lawns? �.1 Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 7 of 19 Lot 1 Block 1 Filing No 2 Eaglebend Subdivision, Two Spanel stated that there was none. Cuny asked if that is a requirement with the Town? Fritzlen state that there has to be availability to a hose bib and a type of landscaping that can be serviced by a hose bib or you have to have irrigation. If the lawn was entirely sodded, irrigation could be required, but that's not the case here. Doll asked if they intend to build these. Spanel stated that their intent is to try to deliver the first unit shortly after or right around Thanksgiving. Hill asked if the rest of the units they plan on building will be similar? Spanel stated that they would be similar. What is planned for one of the other units will be distinctly different. They will use, in order to create the image of being different each time, different colors and may change some roof lines, etc. Cuny stated that as background for the Commission members, this was annexed into the Town of Avon, and when you annex land it comes in as SPA zoned, which is specially planned area, and this is not unusual for them to come in with a parcel and not have it totally planned. You have to look at what they have and not at the total lot. Spanel stated that he felt, as the only single family neighborhood in the Town, it would be an excellent addition to the Town. Further discussion followed on additional landscaping. The view corridor was discussed. Doll moved in the matter of Lot 1, Block 1, Filing 2, Eaglebend Subdivision, Two Single Family Residences, to give final design review approval and that the Staff insure that the recommendations contained in the Staff Report be incorporated before the certificates of occupancies are issued. Laundauer seconded. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 8 of 19 The motion passed unanimously. Fritzlen stated for clarification - All conditions other than the additional landscaping will be met. Cuny replied, correct. Review Fritzlen stated that Jacqueline Montgomery of South Harbor Development Corporation is seeking preliminary design review approval on a proposed duplex on Lot 12, Block 1, Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision. She described the location of this proposal as being directly across from the previously approved project and along the river. It is a fairly long narrow lot. She described the lot shape. Fritzlen then stated that in terns of conformance with the zoning code and other applicable rules and regulstions of the Town of Avon, the applicant is aware that there are several insufficiencies in the application, including landscape plan, survey, grading and drainage, required floor area and site coverage calculations. She stated that she had talktid to the architect about this, but they requested preliminary design review. The proposed access is not in conformance with Town standards. Provision for car turn -around should be included on site plan so it is not necessary to back out onto street. Single road cut is recommended both for safety and reduced site coverage. Right now the driveway is split by an island, there is no opportunity for a hammerhead or some other arrangement where by the cars could turn around and head out onto the street. In regards to design consideration 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. The proposed use is in conformance with Eaglebend SPA plan., The proposed exterior materals are compatible with those in the neighborhood. Material samples were not submitted. Those are wood siding and wood shakes and wood trim. Design consideration 6.13 - the compatibility of the design to minimize site impacts to adjacent properties. - The site Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 9 of 19 Lot 12- Block 1, Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision, is relatively level and easily buildable and a landscape was not submitted, so it is difficult to judge the site impacts in regards to that. 6.14 - the compatibility of proposed improvements with site topography, the site topography was not submitted, so it is difficult to determine if they have moved anything around. 6.15 - the visual appearance of any proposed improvement as viewed from adjacent and neighboring properties and public ways. The height and offsets in the elevations are generally compatible with existing development. It is nice the way they have incorporated several gables, a fair amount of relief on the elevations, it is not a particularly boxy type of proposal, there are some arched windows that are proposed on the rear elevation as well as on the side elevation. 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. The proposed duplex is a mirror-image plan with a seven foot offset. The exact duplication may have a mutually negative monetary and aesthetic impact on the proposed units. Fritzlen stated the Commission should state any comments they may have about mirror-image projects. 6.17 - the general conformance of the proposed improvements with the adopted Goals, Policies and Programs for the Town of Avon - Again, there are no adopted district goals for Eaglebend Subdivision. Fritzlen stated that Staff recommends preliminary approval with the following conditions: Completion of application by submitting required materials; redesign of driveway to Town of Avon standards. Cuny asked Landauer if he recalled any discussion in the past of mirror -images? Landauer stated that there had been a lot of discussion, but mostly concerned with open areas, out where you see all other buildings and then you see a mirror-image like Eagle -Vail started out to be. He stated that it had been discouraged heavily. But he didn't think it would be a problem at this location. Planning and Zonin#,Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 10 of 19 Lot 12 Block 1 Filing No. 1, Eaglebend Subdivision, Tony Siebert stated he was representing the applicant, which is South Harbor Development. He apologized to the Commission and the Staff for the status of the plans. He stated that they fully intend to complete all the missing ingredients before the final design review on the 18th. He stated that regarding the driveway, it would be a single driveway with turn -around and parking for three cars per side. The exterior siding on the building is proposed to be 8" cedar lap siding and had considered the colors of grey and blue, but since the previous applicant is directly across the street and is using the identical colors, they will probably have to get his color chips and try not to conform exactly, so they don't know exactly what the colors will be at this point. Roof line is basically wood, shake shingles. As Staff pointed out, this is a mirror-image duplex, except in this situation we are facing price considerations, however, they have tried to design them so that they do not look like the typical boxy, generic duplex. Landscaping wise, we are on the river side and, unfortunately the plan shows a huge spruce right in the middle of the lot on the river side and it is dead and will have to go, but there are several large cottonwoods there and on the final plan they will delineate them on the plan and show how the landscaping works. They plan to use a combination of sod, and natural grasses, working their way from the duplex down to the stream, using probably pockets of natural grass around the existing trees. We want to get away from a manicured lawn subdivision, suburb, kind of concept, more to a blend of natural grass and sod. Doll asked when construction would begin, assuming they get through reviews. Siebert stated that both units are presold and they hope to break ground in mid-November. Discussion on the driveway and turn -around followed. Hill stated that her comment is in regard to the mirror-image and not ever having dealt with it before, she is not sure how to handle it. Landauer stated that the matter of mirror-image came to a head real quick with things that happened in the Town and in Wildridge and it was discouraged up there where everything _ out in the open and can be seen, but down here in this aieu Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 11 of 19 he has no problem with it. Hill asked how it would it effect the adjoining properties. Doll asked if they had talked to the other home owners? Siebert stated that this is what they would like to see on duplex lots. This lot is long and narrow and the duplex has been moved down reasonably close to the river so they are pretty far away from the road. The land is reasonably fla: and then it drops on a steep bank to the river and we have dropped the living room or the river side of the home actually over the edge and dropped it in, so it will be set down the bank a little bit. Hill stated, then the only thing you are going to be able to see are garages. Siebert stated, yes, basically. Discussion followed on mirror -images in the area. Cuny stated that this was a preliminary design review and in order to be on the next agenda he would have to have all the materials in by what date? Fritzlen stated by the Wed. before the Tuesday or a week before the meeting. Landauer moved to approve the preliminary design review and for the applicant to meet the Staff's recommendations. Hill seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Cuny stated that the record should reflect that Tom Landauer stepped down as a voting member due to a conflict of interest and there is letter to that effect. Fritzlen stated that the record should also reflect that she had contacted the Town Attorney's office today in regards to the definition of a quorum when one of the Commission members Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 12 of 19 is not voting. It was the recommendation of the Town Attorney's office that it indeed would still be a quorum even if one of the members did not vote, if that person stays in the room. A quorum is constituted by four Commission members. Fritzlen stated that L.A.L. Inc. dba Hole -In -The -Wall is requesting a sign variance to continue to be allowed to display, on the same terms approved previously, the 2 x 16 foot banner reading "Breakfast". The permit for the display of the banner expired on September 30, 1988. The applicant would like to continue the signage display past tnis date. Fritzlen stated that the Staff comments are taken from the previous staff report in that the application has not changed significantly or there are any outside conditions that would need to be taken into consideration at this time. The Staff recommends, in that there is no significant changes that would alter the evaluation of this application, Staff recommendation remains primarily as before: Should the Commission decide to grant a variance for the banner, the approval should be limited to a specific time frame, such as one year. Pictures, and a letters regarding this matter have been provided for study. Tanya Landauer stated that the application is identical to the previous one. They are requesting to display the banner from 7AM to 11AM, seven days a week, with possibly setting a period of maybe one year review. The reason that the banner is important is that they are not available to pedestrian traffic where they are located and this is the best way to get exposure to the vehicular traffic. Doll stated that he doesn't see any reason why it shouldn't go on like it has been. Hill asked if they had met the 7 to 11 times. Landauer stated that there had been no problems with it at all. It comes down every morning at 11AM when the bartender comes in. Doll stated that every time he has seen it it has been up neat and orderly. Hill questioned the year time period. Planning and Zoning October 4, 1988 Page 13 of 19 Commission Meeting Minutes Tract Q Block 2. Benchmark at Beaver Creek Hole -In -The -Wall Restauarnt and Bar Sian Variance Request (cont.) Cuny stated she also had a problem with that time period. She asked if they had thought of incorporating it with their signage. Landauer replied that it is hard enough to read the sign and if they add more the words would have to be smaller and harder to read. Cuny asked if they were aware that the sign above the door on the west side was not in the sign program. Landauer stated that no one has come and told us to take it down. Cuny stated that she would rather see something that is more of a permanent type sign. She stated that she was aware that it helps the business and realize the problem of being away from the street. She stated she would like to re-evaluate it before a year. Since there are only three people present to discuss it at this time, she would rather make it for a shorter time period. Landauer asked what she would propose for a time period? Obviously, the ski season is the important season. Doll suggested the first of May. Cuny suggested that during this time they try to find some other alternative. Landauer stated that by the sign program approved for the building about a year ago basically allowed approximately a 10 foot sign and they had to get a variance for a 15 foot sign, since they are the largest occupant. In the current sign program they cannot put up another permanent sign for the Hole -in -the -wall. Cuny stated that they were the only business with two signs. Landauer stated that they had approval for those signs since they have the largest square footage and exposures on both the north and sout side. Doll moved to approve the variance for the Hole -In -The -Wall under the provisions of paragraph 3, a,b,i, ii and iii and that the applicant return not later than May 1, 1989 to have the program re-evaluated. Pl. ing and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes Oc_)uer 4, 1988 Page 14 of 19 Hill seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Fritzlen stated that Pat barron and Tom Swz<rthout of Otis Development Company are presenting a site plop for conceptual review by the Planning and Zoning Commission of a proposed 16,000 square foot commercial building and a 2300 square foot drive-in restaurant. She proceeded to show on an area map the location of the site and the access. She also discussed possible other accesses to the site. She described where the commercial building and the drive-in restaurant would be located on the lot. She described propo^ed pedestrain connections from the Wal -mart parking lot. She stated that staff was very appreciative that the developer has kept site circulation, vehicular circulation and parking next to those two uses. She stated that the following design considerations wer discussed with the applicant prior to the September 30, 1988 submittal. These concerns appear to have been addressed in the site plan presented. Adequate pedestrain and vehicular interconnections to adjacent propf;rties. Conformance with open space, site coverage, parking and loading requirements. Potential building code conformance problems that would he created by development adjacent to existing non -conforming structures at the ncrth and west. Maintaning an unbuilt area on the west s;de of lot that has the potential to become a limited public thoroughfare. She stated that this is something that has been talked about for some mime , it is that eventually to have another mePns of access through the Benchmark Shopping Center property, through the Otis property and into Wal-Mart and back out. This will eventually help relieve the projected traffic conjestion in this area. The developer met the Town's concerns by leaving an unbuilt corridor open. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 15 of 19 The applicant has also incorporated a desirable site design feature, that being a small pond and landscape area to the west of the drive-in that could be used for outdoor dining. The proposed use is in conformance with allowed zoning. The Staff recommendation in regards to this project is the appropriateness of the intended uses and the general vehiculai and pedestrian site circulation should be confirmed at the conceptual level. Previous Staff concerns appear to have been met at this time, therefore Staff recommends that if the proposal is found in conformance with applicable design considerations and adopted goals, the applicant continue on with design develcpment, taking into consideration the Commission's comments and conce•ns. She stated that a copy of the adopted District One Goe"Is had been provided for reference. Tom Swarthout of the Otis Company stated that Pat Barron, of their Denver office was also present. He stated that they were here to get the Commission's comments and feedback on this proposed development. He gave a brief history of Otis Development Company. Cuny asked when they thought they might break ground? Swarthout stated that due to the length of review processes, etc, it would not be this year. Cuny stated that one of the biggest concerns regarding the drive-in restaurant is stacking. How much room is there for stacking? Swarthout stated he thinks there is room for six cars. He stated that that will be a concern that they will study. Discussion followed on this matter. Discussion on the backside of the building facing the Benchmark Shopping Center followed. Also discussed was the access for the loading area. Discussion followed on the pedestrian access and the developer's willingness to provide sidewalks. Planning and Zoning October 4, 1988 Page 16 of 19 Commission Meeting Minutes Vehicular access was tact? discussed. Landscaping was a concern that was discussed. A concern was voiced regarding the ditch that runs through the property and how it will be treated since it flows into Nottingham Lake. Further discussion followed on this. Discussion followed on a possible access road through the Benchmark Shopping Center parking lot and the Otis property and the problems that the drive-in being there might cause. The location of the fast food building was then discussed. Discussion followed on the proposed design of the commercial building. Swarthout stated that it would not be an entirely flat roof. Discussion followed on the landscaping of the parking lot. Further discussion followed on the access to the drive-in restaurant and the concern of using the parking lot to reach the drive-in. Jim Cunningham, representing the Benchmark Shopping Center, voiced his concerns regarding the flow through the property to the Wal-Mart property. He stated that there should ye some way of an_wering the pedestrian flow. Another concern was that they did not want to see the back of a building that is unattractive. He suggested double loading at the ends of the building. He voiced concerns about the access to the fast food restaurant also and felt that this building should be relocated to the Beaver Creek Blvd side. Further discussion on all these concerns followed. Swarthout stated that they were willing to sit down with anybody and fine tune the project. That is their purpose of being here at this time. Fritzlen stated, regarding the proposed access through the Benchmark and Christie Sports property, that if the nature of the access changes significantly, there would be some highway department concerns to deal with. Cuny stated that she thought it admirable that the Otis Company has agreed to make two separate buildings, so that there is a possibility in the future of providing the access. Further discussion followed on the possible future access. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 17 of 19 Cuny stated that conceptually she liked the plan. Doll stated that he did too. Hill stated that she has a few problems with it. Landauer stated that they need to keep in mind the pedestrian flow and the access needs to be worked out. He suggested maybe turning the building on the lot. Discussion Followed regarding this matter. Fritzlen stated that maybe the interior mall could be encouraged by trading it off as usable open space. Swarthout stated that they would take all the comments back and will consider them all. Cuny stated that she felt that the use is definitely appropriate. Landauer stated that item No. 7 of the District One Goals says it all. Fritzlen stated that there are three things to be considered: 1. The possibility of the incorporation of an interior mall and pedestrian interconnection between the existing walkway of Benchmark Shopping Center; 2. The need to confirm the access and more information from the highway department. 3. The possibility of incorporating the trash and screening for the loading area. The Commission agreed that the proposed use was appropriate. Reading and Approval of the Planning and Zoning Minutes of 9/20/88 Regular Meeting Doll moved that the minutes of the last meeting be approved as submitted. Landauer seconded. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 18 of 19 Reading and Approval of the Planning and Zoning Minutes of 9/20/88 Regular Meeting (cont.) The motion carried unanimously. Other Business Cuny reminded the Commission that there is a joint worksession with the Town Council, October 6, 1988. She asked that the absent members be notified. Cuny stated that the next item to be discussed is home occupation, in particular, the Ekrem residence. Fritzlen asked if they ever went through the Special Review Use process. Doll stated that they had not. It was approved as s hobby. Cuny stated that it was approved as a home occupation in the minutes. Doll stated that he had asked the question "do you intend to use this commercially" and she replied "no, it is a hobby for both of us". Further discussion followed on the possibility of this haing a commercial business, rather than a hobby. McGrath stated that the only recourse is if they hire an employee, then the home occupation approval can be revoked. Fritzlen stated that it was her understanding that they st411 have to go through the S.R.U. hearing in order to allow the home occupation itself. Cuny stateu that this sounds right. She requested that Fritzlen check with the Town Attorney and if it is correct then take immediate steps to advise them and have them start proceedings right away. Discussion followed on the type of installation that is installed at the residence, and storage allowances for home occupations. The possibility of them having an employee was discussed. The Staff was asked to keep a close check on this matter and to follow up on the S.R.U. matter. Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes October 4, 1988 Page 19 of 19 Other Business (cont.) Cuny commented on the building identification sign at Benchmark Plaza that shows Rug's Pub and Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner served. She stated that she believes they are only allowed to have their name on it. She also commented on the citation issued by Joe McGrath regarding the breakfast banner. The Coastal Mart signage was discussed. The signs are supposed to be down as of this meeting date. Fritzlen rdported that the Eaglewood Subdivision went through final plat. She described the location of the subdivision for the benefit of the new member. Fritzlen also reported on the Nottingham Station annexation and final plats. Doll moved to adjourn. Hill o.econded The meeting was adjourned at 10:05 PM. Respectfully submitted, Charlette Pascu:zi Recording Secretary Com P. T. F. J. D. C. A.