Loading...
PZC Minutes 060590RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS MINUTES OF PLANNING AND JUNE 5, 1990 ZONING MEETING The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on June 5, 1990, at 7:30 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 Chairman Frank Doll. Members Present: Frank Doll, Buz Reynolds Jack Hunn, Terri Jeppson Clayton McRory, John Perkins Staff Present: Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development, Jim Curnutte, Planner Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary Chairman Doll, at roll call noted that all members, except Sue Railton and Jack Hunn were present. Jack Hunn arrived at 7:40 P.M. Jim Curnutte stated that the Commission has seen this proposal before at its conceptual stage. The applicants are proposing a single family residence. The lot is almost an acre in size. The building footprint is about 2,250 square feet, for a small building area ratio of 6%. Building square footage is approximately 2,500 and the maximum building height is 33 feet. The house is set back nearly 100 feet from Wildridge Road West and 20 feet from the west property line and 50 feet from the south lot line. A landscape plan has been provided. The building is a two story gable roof building. The exterior materials are proposed to be 10" diameter peeled and stained logs, stained with silver oak, mortar white is the proposed chinking and is also the color of the stucco that will be used around all exposed foundation walls. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria, stating that this project is in conformance with the zoning code and other applicable regulations of the Town. Regarding the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 2 of 19 suitability of the improvement, the exterior materials are hand peeled log, wood trim and stucco with cedar shake shingles and regarding compatibility, the house is sited in about the best location on the lot for not only grade but also to accomodate the grade of the driveway. Landscape clusters have been provided around the entire structure. Regarding the compatibility with the topography, Staff feels the building does work well with the site. The appearance of this residence from neighboring properties and public ways seems acceptable. The residence will set lower than the surrounding roads and most of the adjacent lots in the area. The staff sees no conflict with the objective that no improvement be so similar or dissimilar to others in the vicinity that values, monetary or aesthetic will be impaired. The proposal is in general conformance with Goals, Policies and Programs of the Town of Avon. Curnutte stated that the Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. The driveway entrance must comply with the applicable Town standards, a road cut permit is required; 2. A more detailed drainage plan be submitted for staff review at the time of building permits. Chairman Doll commented that the main concern of the Commission, at the time of the site visit, was the driveway. Bruce Kelly stated that the staff had stated that the steep part of the driveway would have to be at least 1-1/2 to 1 grade. The original site plan shows a 2 to 1 grade. They have brought the entrance of the driveway, from the road to the property line, to a four percent grade instead of a six percent grade. Another concern of the 6ommission was the width of the driveway. Making the driveway too much wider would cause more of a problem with the grade on the slope to Wildridge Road. The excavator and architect recommended leaving the driveway at the present width. The width is now a little over 12 feet. Kelly then provided samples of the colors. The stucco will be called cottonwood, but is very close to the mortar white to be used in chinking. He provided a sample of the silver oak color also. Kelly stated that the main reason that they are going with the cedar shake shingles is that at the previous meeting the Commission pointed out the visibility of the roof. Discussion followed on the dormer detail. Further discussion followed on the width of the driveway. The applicant plans to gravel the drive and give it approximately a year or year PLANNING AND ZONIONG COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 3 of 19 and a half to become compacted and then asphalt it. What they would like to do after the first winter is chip and seal it to be able to plow it better. Also, it then wouldn't take quite as much asphalt. Jack Hunn stated that what has been done in the past is to have the first twenty feet or so in paved, so that gravel is not dragged out into the street. Also there needs to be some sort of bond to give the Town some mechanisim to trigger the paving as proposed. Hunn also made some suggestions regarding the landscaping. He asked if this was an irrigated plan. The applicant stated that it is not in the beginning, but will have a drip system at a later date. Perkins agreed with the staff's comments about the drainage. John Perkins moved to grant approval to Lot 63, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision, Kelly Residence, Final Design Review, with the conditions that the driveway entrance must comply with the applicable requirements of the Town of Avon and that the driveway be made as wide as possible and still maintain an acceptable grade on the driveway; and, a more detailed drainage plan be submitted for staff review at the time of building permit application. Terri Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Rick Pylman stated that the Commission has seen this application before a couple times. It was originally a house sited on the eastern portion of the lot. Then the applicant came wanting to build two single family houses on the lot. Staff explained to the applicant the definition of a duplex and if he wanted to pursue a subdivision, the procedure for that. He may do that one day, but now he has come back with the same design that he has reworked himself and has now located on the western portion of the site and would like to rescind his previous approval and is asking final approval for this house. Pylman stated that the one real change from tris previous house is taking it from a two story to a single story residence. He stated that the residence is in conformance with all Avon zoning regulations. The specific driveway design must meet Town of Avon design standards upon issuance of a building permit. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, ;990 Page 4 of 19 Lot 38 Block 2. Wildridge Subdivision Ackerman Residence Design Review, Continued The materials are very similar to the previously proposed residence. It is basically a stucco house with a mushroom color and a cedar shingle roof. Pylman stated that althought there is a lot of grading, the lot is big enough that it will not impact adjacent properties in a negative way. Regarding the compatibility with site topography, the fact that the applicant wants to go with a one story house on a sloping lot makes it difficult to minimize the grading that will be required. Staff does not feel that this approach to building design is compatible with site topography. Pylman stated that this appears to be a complete application. There is a landscape plan provided, building materials are present, etc. Staff's concerns are regarding the grading plan that is forced by the type of architecture. Tom Wagenlander, representing Mr. Ackerman, stated that he is here to answer any questions and relay any comments back to Mr. Ackerman. Jack Hunn stated that he has no problem with the house in terms of style or floor plan or finishes, but the problem is that the single story house is being forged on a site that dictates a two story solution. There are radical grade changes from the house to the existing topography that will apparently be handled in a massive regrading and some amount of boulder retaining walls. As far as the concept of the future unit, Hunn cautioned that the distance between those two units should be greater than what is shown on the plan. He is also concerned with the level of documentation. He feels that the plans are not well prepared. He will have a hard time supporting this application for those reasons. John Perkins concurred with Hunn's comments qnd stated that the grading plan is very difficult to read. He feels that the building does not work with the topography of the site. He stated that there needs to be some detail as to the fascia treatments; are there any window trim treatments; the north side maybe needs a little more glass; overall the drawings need better detail, better clarification. Reynolds suggested that the applicant try to soften the amount of cut by the placing of this house on the lot. Considerable discussion followed on the placement of the house on the site. Chairman Doll suggested continuing this application until ,sWA vW N PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 5 of 19 Design Review, Continued such a time that Mr. Ackerman can maybe compromise between the two solutions he has presented so far. McRory moved to continue Lot 38, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision, Ackerman Residence, until such a time as so designated by Staff, when the applicant returns with better engineered drawings of site work, elevations and better detail drawing of the site plan. Reynolds seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Lot 3r, RevBlock 3. Benchmark at Bea,. -or Creek Valley Business Cents ision to Design Review Rick Pylman stated that the revisions are really a site plan revision. The applicant felt that a better site plan solution would be to separate out the car wash. The car wash is now a separate free-standing building. The main building, housing the restaurant and office uses, is sited in relatively the same position. The only other issue involved is the minor revisions to the architecture necessary and a change in the roofing materials. Steve Riden, representing Jeff Gibson, stated that they wish to separate the car wash as they feel it inhances the circulation and improves the quality of the original building and also allowing them to separate functions. They will be lowering the original building about 18 inches, as they do not need the height for the bays. The materials for the car wash will be identical to the original building. They feel they gc-t better usage out of the site with more parking, etc. The colors have not been changed. Since the car wash bays will be moved, they will be filling in those areas with wood frame with siding, so that when retail comes in there they can put in a store front without too much problem. Mr. Riden stated that they want to propose the use of asphalt shingles. They desire a smooth, even texture, and something of less maintenance. He cited the future availability of red cedar, and price increases as reasons for this request. Discussion followed on the color and texture of the asphalt shingles. The applicant did not have a sample of the shingle. Discussion followed on the weight of the shingle. It is a fire -rated shingle. Considerable discussion followed or, the changes to be made to the original building. PLANNING AND June 5, 1990 Page 6 of 19 ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Discussion followed on the placement of the car wash and the possible problem of the lines of cars that may be backed up. Discussion also followed on the placement of the trash enclos,ire. Discussion also followed on the landscaping. Several conversations were being conducted at the same time, therefore, none of them are clear. Hunn stated that he feels there will be a problem with the car wash and the cars that will be backed up into the street. Also, of concern is the turning radius. He also has a concern if there is a third building on the site. He liked the building as approved in terms of the scale and mass and felt that it could be sort of a mother hen to a smaller building. Now, there would be a complex of three buildings and it starts to get busy and confusing. He would not be in favor of the third building. He is concerned with the limo service and the number of vehicles he will store on the site diminishing the available parking for the public. He recommends in considering the parking requirements for this building, the number of spaces used for storage of vehicles not count for their parking allocation, so that there will be enough spaces 10c the shops, restaurant, etc. He was concerned with the location of the dumpster and the changes to the landscaping. Snow storage will also be a problem. Hunn stated that he feels that this project is in the exit -entrance points to Beaver Creek Resort and seen in the context with the backdrop of the Sunridge complex, which is all cedar roofs, and feels that this building should still have cedar shakes. He feels that the asphalt shingles would detract from the image of the building. Riden stated that they have supplied at least twice the amount of space for cars at the car wash as the one next to Paddy O'Day's, which was used as an example of the possible problems. Further discussion followed on this matter. Riden stated that the dumpster would be enclosed. Further discussion followed on the landscaping and snow storage. Discussion followed on the area for the parking of the stored vehicles. Reynolds stated that he liked the two color roof. He was also concerned with the snow storage. More discussion followed on the entrance and exit of the car wash. Discussion followed on the landscaping, parking, etc. in connection with Sunridge. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 7 of 19 Chairman Doll summarized the Commission concerns as being; whether there is enough space to park the cars that are coming in to be washed; the question of getting together with the State and the Town regarding the landscaping of the main driveway; The problem with the adjacent property owners, regarding their landscaping and an access back and forth; the concern of the adjacent landowner regarding the trash enclosure; and the roof. The representative of Sunridge stated that he stated the concerns because he had been approached previously about the possibility of using part of the Sunridge parking for commercial parking, and Sunridge does not have adequate amounts. Their concern is overflow parking coming on the their property. He feels that a solution could be worked out regarding the dumpster enclosure by putting some screening behind it. Jack Hunn moved to deny the reconfiguration of the density on the site, as submitted, as it complicates the traffic flow and site planning issues. John Perkins seconded. The motion carried four to two with Terri Jeppson and Buz Reynolds voting nay. Jack Hunn moved to deny the request materials as presented tonight. John Perkins seconded. The motion failed with a vote of Reynolds, Jeppson, and Doll voting The applicant will be allowed to material, wi'uh the condition that roofing material for the Commission to substitute the roofing four to two with McRory, nay. use the asphalt roofing he provide a sample of the to study. Lots 2 12 Block 1 Eaglebend Filing 4, Eaglebend Apartments Conceptual Design Review. Chairman Doll stated that since this is a conceptual design review there will not be any formal actions taken at this time. The Chairman stated that there were two members of the Commission, Buz Reynolds and Jack Hunn, that have conflicts of interest in this matter. Jim Curnutte stated that there have been some revisions made since the staff report was written and the applicants will be a 0"� '"'1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 8 of 19 1�_ R1nck 1 Eaglebend Filing 4,Eaglebend pointing them out as they go along. Curnutte then gave a short chronology of the history of the property and described the zoning and development plans that were approved at the time of annexation. Curnutte stated that the applicants would like the Commission to offer conceptual comments with regards to the proposal to resubdivide and submit a new plan, for lots 2 - 12 and Tract A. Curnutte stated that this type of use and density is currently approved by way of the previously approved SPA plan. The proposal includes 240 units ( 20, 12 unit buildings). Currently there are 139 development rights assigned to the property. With the fractionalization being proposed here, the applicants will be well under the allowed number of units they could put on the property. Curnutte stated that upon vacating all the interior lot lines, the resulting land area would total approximately 9.3 acres. The amount of open space provided on this plan is less than on the previously approved plan. The buildings are proposed to be three story, wood frame buildings with pitched roofs. The applicant will describe the materials, etc. Building height will be about 44 feet from finish grade to the peak of the highest ridgeline. Two access drives are proposed to come in off Eaglebend Drive, although the applicant is considering an entrance off of Stonebridge Drive and eliminating one of the accesses on Eaglebend Drive. There are six different types of floor plans being proposed. A landscape is now being provided. The property is located in the Riverfront district, which provides some recommendations: Buildings should be set back from the river to preserve its natural character; Building heights should be three or four stories, sloped roofs, indigenous materials and muted colors; Building facade should be stepped down as it approaches the river; and .s.,A _" ua_,1 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 9 of 19 Lots 2 - 12 Block 1 Eaglebend Filing 4, Eaglebend Apartments Conceptual Design Review Continued Provide access to the river for the public. The existing boundary line of Tract A is currently being proposed to be shifted, and Staff feels that this is a good idea to promote efficient and good site planning. Staff would like to see that the line be placed so it would not preclude the construction of a future recreation trail along the property and parallel with the river. Staff recommends 15 feet from the bank. Curnutte stated that at 240 units, the potential population could warrant the need of public transportation and Staff would like to see the site plan include, although it may not be necessary at this time, two locations for a future bus stop. With regard to recreational amenities for this amount of people, the current plan includes a volleyball court, a basketball court has been added, some charcoal grills throughout. Staff would like the applicants to consider a community building for the residents to provide indoor recreational amenities in the winter. The building could also be used as an on-site management office. The applicant should address the demand that this project will be creating on an already short supply of child care in the valley. Curnutte stated that the internal road widths and turning radii do not appear to be adequate for fire department vehicles. Irternal fire hydrants will be necessary. Fire alarm systems will be required. Detailed information regarding drainage, grading and revegetation has not been received. Extensive buffering should be provided along the west property line to minimize the impacts of this project on the adjacent property. Jeff Spanel, representing Eaglebend Partnership, reviewed the history of this project. He stated that they have been working with the Town since January. They were awarded, on April 5th, a five millon dollar allocation of bonds from the State of Colorado. In order to get this allocation, they had to agree to reserve 40% of the units for affordable housing, which restricts the rents. They are proposing to push that number to 50%. The cap on one bedroom units would be $375.00 to a maximum for a three bedroom units of $485.00. The PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 10 cf 19 Lots 2 - 12 Block 1. Eaglebend Filing 4 Eaglebend Apartments Conceptual Design Review. Continued balance of the program will be at market rates. They also have received a tax credit allocation from the Colorado Housing Finance Authority. They now have enough financing to do the first two phases of the project. The next phase of the project is total market rate. Phase one will probably be the western part of the project. He pointed out the buildings on the drawings. He then pointed out Phase Two and Phase Three which will be the river front buildings. The Council asked that they include some for sale units for a mix of rental and owner occupied units. At this time they do not know how it will work, but they have agreed to try it. That is why Phase Three is reserved for this. Spanel stated that Vail Associates is now a fifty percent partner in the project. Eaglebend will be responsible for the construction of the units and Vail Associates will take care of the short fall. The restrictions put on using public funds will keep Vail Asociates from getting preferential treatment on unit allocation. Spanel described some of the floor plans, the colors and the roofing. hie stated that they are in the process of negotiating a property management contract with Lincoln Propert4es. Spanel stated that, regarding the community building, because of the restricted rents, they do not know if they can afford it. That may be one of the trade offs made to keep this project affordable. Discussion followed on Tract A and the realignment of it. Doll stated that this is one of the steepest river banks in the valley and he would prefer to limit the access there rather than increase it. John Perkins suggested that if groups of the buildings could be taken off the ninety degree to each other so it would be more a cluster concept rather than so linear. Spanel stated that there are some physical cor,�traints on the site in the way the water line goes through the site. Perkins also voice concern that all the buildings are the same design. Spanel reminded the Commission that t'"ey are PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 11 of 19 limited on funds. He stated that Bill James had met with them at tKe architect's office and they had looked at several sketches and had arrived at this one. Perkins stated he agrees with the staff comments, especially regarding a community building and public transportation. Spanel stated that there is no problem with the transportation issue. Perkins stated he favors an entry off of the east side and a strong landscape barrier along the east side. McRory stated he would like to see more renderings from the different directions. He did not feel that this presentation wa., done very well. Discussion followed on this matter. McRory suggested using different color schemes on the buildings to help break up the massing, since all the buildings are the same design. He stated he w.3uld like to see more work put in on the landscaping. McRory stated that because of the need for this type project, he, as a Commission member, will be very flexible. Jeppson stated that she likes the way the units are situated so that there is a common landscaping area .nd everyone sees green. She stated that she would like to see the two courts put more in the interior to protect the people on the east side of Stonebridge Drive. She prefers to see the entrances where they are currently shown. She stated her concern is also a day care facility. Discussion followed on the requirements for day care facilities. Discussion followed on maybe using one unit as a day care facility. Jeppson stated she would like to see maybe three different style buildings, rather than all the same, and different colors. Perkins suggested that the applicant could save some money by eliminating the wing walls. Spanel stated that they are there to lend some privacy to the patio areas. Perkins stated that he feels they will not be happy with the grey and black trim as proposed. Further discussion followed on this matter. It was suggested that playground equipment be included also. Chairman Doll suggested the applicant consider these comments and suggestions when preparing for the final design review. : VN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 12 of 19 Jim Curnutte stated that there are actually two applications presented. One is a SPA Amendment or Zone Change, and a Special Review Use application. The applicant is proposing to transfer one development right from Lot 7 to Lot 70 and one developmenmt righrt from Lot 11 to Lot 71, in Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision. -urrently all four of the lots are approved for duplex lots. Lot 7 and Lot 11 are about an acre and a half and almost an acre resrectively. The upper one third of each of these lots are currently restricted by plat as non -developable areas. The upper lots slope at somewhere between 25-30%. Lots 70 and 71 are almost an acre and a half of an acre, respectively. Their average slopes appear to be about 20%. Curnutte reviewed the criteria for approva'. All four of the lots are undeveloped and are currently in compliance with the zoning code. The transfer would occur totally within Block 4 of the Wildridge Subdivision and therefore would not change the previous density of that area. There are currently 2 single family lots, 78 duplex lots, 3 triplex lots, 3 fourplex lots and two open space tracts within this Block. Due to the steepness of Lots 7 and 11, the proposed density transfer would appear to be beneficial to that area. The rezoning of Lots 70 and 71 to triplex would not appesr to be compatible with surrounding uses, as they are all duplex in this area. If Lots 70 and 71 were to receive a third residential development right, they would have the capability to request a fractionalization. At this time single family and duplexes cannot be fractionalized. Not enough detail has been provided to determine whether or not there is sufficient lot area necessary for efficient site development. The applicant has indicated that he intends to vacate the lot line between Lots 70 and 71 and resubdivide and create six single family lots. To date no information has been provided on this concept. Staff feels it is essential to receive some sort of sketch plan to see if this is even feasit;le. Staff recommendation is that if it is the applicants intent to transfer the development rights for the purpose of constructing triplex or any kind of fractionalized project on PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 13 of 19 Lots 70 and 71, Staff would recommend denial of such an application due to its incompatibility with surrounding properties and surrounding zoning. If on the other hand, the applicant is only interested in this request for the sole purpose of creating six single family lots on the combined areas of Lots 70 and 71, staff recommends that both applications be tabled until such time that a plan is received to determine that the idea makes sense. Reynolds stated he thought that ther, was a restriction that if a development right was transferred to a duplex lot it could not be used. He cited the transfer done in the past on Lot 23. Curnutte stated that Mr. Nottingham had agreed in writing not to use that development right for the purpose of constructing a triplex or fractionalizing. The development right is simply being stored. Mark Simon stated that the Staff has covered this issue very well. What they are trying to do is change the lots at the top of Wildridge Road to single family lots and move the density to the lots at the end of Ferret Lane. By taking Lots 70 and 71 and splitting them into six single family lots each one of those single family lots will be approximately the size that Lot 72 and Lot 68 are if those were split into single family lots. He feels that this would be consistent with the lots imr.ediately near by. He is asking the Commission to approve the idea, subject to the following conditions: 1. No fractionalization is possible on these lots; 2. The lots will not be subject to the building of a single triplex building on each lot. They will be used only for the purpose of building single family homes. Chairman Doll then opened the public hearing. Reynolds stated that he had received four phone calls from neighboring properties stating that they are opposed. Curnutte stated that two letters. One is from H.E. Stocker, Jr., owner of Lot 83, Block 4, stating that he is opposed to the granting of the transfer and objects to triplex units being constructed adjacent to their property. They feel it would lessen the value of their property. The second letter PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING M.NUTES June 5, 1990 Page 14 of 19 is from Robert and Kathleen Kunis, owners of Lot 68. They state that they purchased their property with the belief that the surrounding property would remain zoned and allow either single family or duplex units and are concerned that this proposal would change that significantly. They do not feel that the applicant would suffer any undue hardship if this proposal is denied, because they would still have their existing zoning. Chairman then closed the public hearing. Chairman Doll stated that he thought the applicant was going about this backwards. He feels that all the triplex and fractionalization questions could be solved by coming in with the subdivision plans. Hunn stated that he agrees that triplexes are not appropriate up there and certainly not fractionalization. The conditions proposed would perhaps make sense if the Commission could see the development plan for the six single family lots. He questions whether six single family homes could be fit with adequate space in between. Minimum space between them, grade changes, Town of Avon road standards would have to be met, and many more challenges would have to be considered. It would also force the building mass out to the limits of the property setbacks. He will be reluctant to act on any portion of the proposal before he could see the whole proposal. Hunn stated that he also feels that this should be tabled until more information is received and the property owners are informed again. McRory moved to continue this Special Review Use for Lots 7, 11, 70, 71, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision, until such a time that the applicant can supply enough detail of the intended use of the lots for determination of sufficent lot area to ba developed. Also, that the adjoining property owners ae properly notifed of proposed development. Jeppson seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Lot 67/68 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek, City Market. Design Review Rick Pylman's opening comments are not transcribable, due to the fact that he was making them at the same time as passing out the plans. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 15 of 19 Lot 67/68 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek City_Market, Design Review Continued He stated that this review is for the entry only. Pylman stated that the Commission should carefully review the color samples of the roofing material and the conformance with the zoning code. Mark Donaldson, representing City Market, Inc., stated that he would like to briefly introduce the entry revisions and then recap from the conceptual review because they have made some movement in that direction. He stated that the entry will be the first part of construction for City Market. The entry will be realigned from the south facing, side entry to right through the middle. He pointed out the location on a revised site plan from the last meeting. The existing middle drive is being widened and that will be in line with the new entry features. The new roof design will shed no water or snow from any portion of the building, anywhere on any ground surface. Everything is discharged through roof drainage systems. Enternal roof drainage that goes down below grade. They will have a completely dry area around the pedestrian way. The architecture of the entry feature has been designed to balance with the new expansions as well as what is there now. Hopefully, at the next meeting, they will be coming back in with a new color scheme, accent colors, use of materials, etc. He stated that they are proposing the metal roof color to a blue. There are two or three shades of blues and greens around the neighborhood. They do not want to match the same colors. It is a high quality metal roof product, and is their standard deep blue, and has been approved by City Market. There will be additional colors introduced on the entry,and they are the highlights of the convex shaped light features. Those will be surface mounted concave lights that send the light outside the fixture. This will be done in the deep blue. The next use of materials will be the split Face block and ribbed block. Discussion followed on the metal roof. It will be non -sheen. Discussion followed on the placement of the public phones, ice machines, newspaper stands, etc. Discussion followed on the roof forms. Discussion followed on the lighting. The location of the signage was discussed. They are proposing two major signs and a graphic sign on the building. Donaldson stated they are asking for final approval on the entry feature. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 16 of 19 Further discussion followed on the roof and building colors being used in the area. Jeppson moved to grant approval to Lot 67/68, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek, City Market entry way, and to the metal roof AEP -Span 24 guage steel medium tlue, non -sheen. Hunn seconded. The motion carried unanimously. Donaldson then reviewed some of the comments provided at the last meeting. He stated that they requirements. There will be sidewalk Discussion followed on entry just approved. Discussion followed housing. will be meeting the 20% open space and handicapped access. the second housing in relation to the on provisions for storage for the Rick Pylman stated that since this is conceptual, he did not do a staff report on this item. He stated that The Annex was reviewed with a fast food site. Included in that development is a fifty foot dedicated access easement that provided some access from Avon Road through the area. During the Master Plan process this concept was taken a step further and it is recommended to be a collector road. When the Master Plan was finished the Town commissioned a traffic analysis of the whole East Beaver Creek Blvd., shopping center district and the final draft should be completed in about two weeks. This report should give the Town alternatives of alignments and right-of-way widths, etc. The Town Council will have to choose one of those alternatives and in the future pursue that as a traffic flow area in that part of town. At this time they do not know what that is and he hates to look at a project and say that a study needs to be done, but that is what he is telling the Commission at this time. He recommends that no changes be made to the existing situation, until those alternatives are identified. It will only be a few weeks away. Plans have been provided for a new configuration for a Hardees restaurant. Originally the Kentucky Fried Chicken PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 17 of 19 utilized a small site plan and it worked well in the confined area. Any other fast food restaurant will require more space and will require some site plan amendments. Pat Barron is has a potential user of th9 space and is here with a conceptual review. Pat Barron reviewed the history of the easement. They were first told to place the easament between the retail portion and the restaurant portion, which they did. Then Norm Wood sent a memo stating that they did not want the road to bisect the property, they want it to skirt the two properties. The property was redesigned again to accomodate this. What they want to do is go back to the original plan. He would not like to wait for the study. He stated that Brian Pesch agrees with this concept. He stated that the original plan is the one that will work for Hardees. They have an approved franchise and approved site, subject to the Town's approval. The Town's approval is the last issue to be dealt with. It is really a timing issue. They have someone ready to go now. Considerable discussion followed on the matter of the location of the easement. Discussion followed on the proposed site plan. Mark Donaldson gave a history of Tract G and the property of 182 Avon Corp. Jack Huhn stated that he would like some time to evaluate the site plan based on its own merits and since the traffic study is two weeks away and another two we3ks for the Council, this would not seem unreasonable. Mr. Barron stated that he did not have the time problem, it is Hardees that is pushing. Donaldson stated that what they are asking for is comments from the Commission that they can take to Council next meeting. They would like to have a memo to the Council stating the Commission's feelings on this item. Discussion followed on the parking situation on this site. Barron stated that he was told by Norm Wood that the Town did not have the money to buy the road, and if they would give them the easement, then parking would be allowed to park along it. The easement was a condition of getting approval. Reynolds stated that basically, with the previous apprc. the Commission has done their part. Now it is up to thF- PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINU-ES June 5, 1990 Page 18 of 19 Council to come up with the road siting. The Commission was divided in half regarding this concept. Worksession on the Grand on Avon Rick Pylman stated that this item has been discussed with the Council and it is felt that the Commission should be aware of what is happening. Mark Donaldson stated that they are adding a porte-cochere on tna south side of the center of the Grand on Avon, formally know as the Peregrine. Donaldson stated that they will be coming back at the next meeting with a formal variance application for building within six inches of the front yard setback for the porte-cochere. Discussion followed on the proposed plans and propnsed tenants. The main thing they are trying to do is generate a real focal point. Discussion followed on the reasons that a bus stop would not work. Pylman stated that they feel they would be better off a couple hundred feet away. Discussion followed on the landscaping and walkways, etc. The colors were also discussed. The new roof form was discussed. Discussicn of using stone vs all stucco followed. Reynolds moved to adjourn. Perkins seconded. The meeting was adjourned at app,oximately 12:00 AM. Respectfully submitted, Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 5, 1990 Page 19 of 19 Commiss F. Doll T. Jepp J. Hunn J. Perk S. Rail C. McRc A. Reyr 1 /l /,-/l\ s a