Loading...
PZC Minutes 031792RECORD OF PRO-'EEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on March 17, 1992, at 7:30 PM in the Town Council Chambers, Avon Town Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Rd., Avon, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Perkins. Members Present: John Perkins, Buz Reynolds, Clayton McRory, Patti Dixon, Sue Railton, Henry Vest, Jack Hunn Staff Present: Jim Curnutte, Town Planner; Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development; Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary Chairman Perkins stated that all members were present. Town Clerk, Patty Neyhart, administered the oath to the newly appointed member, Jack Hunn. Lot 18, Filing 1,_Eagl_ebend_ Subdivision, Railton Residence, Front Yard Setback Variance Request Public Hearing Sue Railton stepped down as a voting member of the Commission due to a conflict of interest with this item. Jim Curnutte stated that the Railtons are requesting a variance from the front yard setback. The request is to encroach approximately 19 to 20 feet into the front yard setback, for a portion of two three car carports. In addition, there is a five or six foot stone wall that is also located in the setback. Curnutte stated that the applicant has provided a site plan of the neighborhood, showing all the setback variances that have been granted. Curnutte stated that some decks are shown on each side that encroach into the side setbacks, however, the applicant nas stated that all those improvements are at ground level, thererore a setback variance is not necessary tor, those improvements. The lot itself is about 16,000 sq. ft. in size, however, due to the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 Page 2 of 10 gly._Railton Residence Front Eagle River, as well as the ad2acent 30' wide Metcalf Ditch easement, the actual building area of the lot is significantly reduced to approximately half of that 16,000 sq. ft. In addition, if you subtract the areas within the setbacks, the final buildable area is about 4800 sq. ft. That is approximately 30% of the overall lot size. The units themselves are near 3,000 sq, ft. each. Curnutte stated that three letters had been received regarding this matter, one from Chris Ekrem, one from John Appleby, and one from Harlan Swift. All three letters advocated approval of this setback request. Curnutte then reviewed the criteria for considering a variance, stating that, although the river embankment and easement does limit the buildable area, there is sufficient area tett over to build a structure, although it may not be the size desired by the applicant. Variances have been granted up and down the block. Curnutte described the variances that had been approved. Curnutte stated that Staff feels that requesting a variance to accommodate a three car carport is excessive. Staff encourages as many off street parking as possible, but whether or not these spaces need to be fully or partially covered is more a matter of design or convenience than a necessity. Curnutte stated that the Commission must make findings, which have been provided, if the Commission grants or den -es this variance Curnutte stated that Staff recommendation is for denial of the variance request as presented, because of the requst for a three car carport. Curnutte stated that a resolution documenting the Commission's decision will be presented at the April 7, 1992 meeting. John Railton stated that there are a number of lots that have been granted a variance in the Eaglebend Subdivision because of the location of the Metcalf Ditch. If this house was setback further than proposed it would restrict the open space and more importantly it would obstruct the views of the houses that are already built. Regarding building a three carport, Mr. Pailton compared the proposed carports with the building of a two car garage and the space that each solution would occupy. He feels that the three cars conceled behind the landscape stone wall is better visually for the street and the neighborhood, than two cars parked in a car port or garage and two other cars in plain view. Considerable PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 Page 3 of 10 Lot 18, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdi_v_ision,.,.Railton _ Residence,, Front Yard Setback Variance Reguest,PubI c Hearing cont) discussion followed on carports vs. garages. Chairman Perkins opened the public hearing. With no public input forthcoming, other than the three above described letters, Chairman Perkins then closed the public hearing. Buz Reynolds asked about the roof structure of the carport. Railton stated that it is designed in such a way that it slopes down towards the front. Reynolds asked Staff if this variance would interfere with snow removal. Staff did not feel it would. Jack Hunn stated that a streetscape has been established by the existing buildings, and there is a precedent for this request. He stated that he would rather see the third car screened, than out in the open. Hunn asked if the Town requires a garage, rather than a carport. Rick Pylman stated that there is no requirement for a garage. Clayton McRory stated that he agreed with the Staff in that the three car carport is excessive. Discussion followed on the available parking spaces other than the carports. Railton stated that probably that two more cars on each side could be parked there. Further discussion followed on the degree of encroachment for the variance. Perkins stated that he finds this a very pleasing alternative to garage doors. Henry Vest moved to grant the front yard setback variance to Lot 18, Filing 1, Eaglebend Subdivision, as requested, citing the following findings: A. That the granting of the variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of other properties classified in the same district; B. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; C. That the variance is warranted for the following reason: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 Page 4 of 10 )n,__Rai_]ton _,lesldence Front Heal_ i.n-g._( cont)_ 3. 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 same district. Patti Dixon seconded and the motion carried with Clayton McRory voting nay. Sue Railton returned as a voting member of the Commission. Lot 101, Block 1, Wildridge_Sub div ision-, Ski _V ista_ Townhomes� Material Change Request Jim Curnutte stated that the Ski Vista Townhomes were approved originally on May 1, 1990. It is now under construction. The approved building materials at that time were cedar lap siding, cedar trim and stucco. The approved roofing material was a #2 medium cedar shake. The applicant is proposing a change from the cedar shake shingle to an asphalt shingle. It is the Heritage Premium, with a weight of 340 lbs per square and a thirty five year warranty. The color is birchwood or weathered wood. Curnutte briefly reviewed the past history of approvals for asphalt shingles. Randy Johnson described the proposed asphalt shingle, stating that there is a bit of relief pattern to it. Henry Vest stated that the project looks very good at this time, however, he suggested upgrading the proposed asphalt roof. He doesn't feel 340 lbs per square is heavy enough. Considerable discussion followed on the design of the building. The Commission was concerned that there was not enough relief on the proposed product. Jack Hunn stated that he was on the Commission when Lhis project was originally approved and it received a lot of scrutiny at that time. The reason that the Commission was comfotable with it is that it was a good design and it would be built of quality materials that were consistent with the buildings in that general neighborhood, and that it had a very significant landscape plan. For those three reasons, he felt that the fractionalized request was warranted. The applicant has in essence made a commitment to build a certain building with certain products. The applicant responded that he is just asking to upgrade the roofing material, because the cedar shake roof will only last about ten years. Jack i0 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 Page 5 of 10 lot 101. Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision__ Ski Vista Townhomes, Material Change Request, (conte Hunn stated that he did not share that opinion. Also, there is an established neighborhood in that area. The buildings all around this site all have cedar shake roofs. He feels that the approval of an asphalt roof on this particular project would cause this project to be dissimilar to the buildings in that neighborhood. Clayton stated that another product should be looked at as far as providing more relief. Patti Dixon stated that she would tend to approve the material change if it had a deeper relief. Chairman Perkins stated that he tends to agree with Jack Hunn. He feels that this project was approved partially on the strength of the materials that had been presented. He would like to see the applicant stay with the wood shingles. Buz Reynolds moved to approve the roof change for Lot 101, Block 1, Ski Vista Townhomes, to the weatherwood color, Tamko product. Clayton McRory seconded. The motion was denied, with a Reynolds, Railton and McRory voting aye, and Dixon, Hunn, Perkins and Vest voting nay. Lot 20, Block 3,Wildridge Subdiv_i_sion_,_ Brian Vedder Duplex, Conceptual Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that the applicant lives in the LA area and Mark Scully is present to hear the Commission's comments. Curnutte stated that the applicant is requesting conceptual design review on a duplex. The lot itself is 60,548 sq. ft. in size. The applicant is proposing a 14' wide driveway that loops around the southern building and provides access to the northern building. It is relatively flat in front of the southern garage to provide adequate backup and maneuvering room. For the most part though, until you get to the northern most unit the driveway is consistently at 10% grade. The applicant is proposing 18 high driveway lights along the driveway. The duplex steps down in several different levels as it goes down with the topography of the lot. There is a raised porte' cochere/patio or deck that connects the two buildings, therefore would meet the definition of a duplex. The upper unit has about 2000 sq. ft. and the lower urit is about 2700 sq. ft. in size. Both will have a 3 car garage and gas fireplaces. The exterior building materials are: Fired ceramic shingles, blue -grey color; stucco siding ; aluminum framed ob PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 Page 6 of 10 Lot 20. Blo q. Wildrid_ge_Subdivlsjon,_ _ Brian Vedder___ Duplex, Conceptual DecReview._(contJ_ windows; multipane douglas fir doors; red sandstone veneer at chimneys and retaining walls; and plexiglass skylights, milky white. The grading/drainage and landscape plan are very conceptual. There will be a formal irrigated sod area. Some of the trees on the east side of the lot are proposed to be up -lit. The patio areas are fired brick. Curnutte stated that the topo was based on one of the original topos for the subdivision and it seems that the actual topo is quite a bit different. The applicant has retained Inter -Mountain Engineering to do a topo. There will be some changes regarding the driveway, etc. Buz Reynolds stated he was concerned with the driveway and also with the proposed roofing product, if there is any sheen on it. The Commission that they would like to see a samole of the proposed roofing material. Discussion followed on the connection between the two buildings. The Commission felt that the project flows down the hill well. Discussion followed on the definition of a duplex, and the various duplexes that have been approved. Jack Hunn stated that he felt that there is a very week connection betweer the two units. Patti Dixon stated that she felt the way it is proposed now is better than having a big mass of building. Her only concern was having the driveway work, there needs to be a better topo on this site. It was felt that the upper unit needs a turnaround area. Chairman Perkins recapped the comments as follows: An accurate topo is needed to clarify the grades; provide a roofing sample of the material to be approved; the connection should be carefully evaluated and perhaps strengthened; and the possibly of providing a turnaround in the driveway and the width of the drive be at least 16'. As this was a conceptual design review, no formal action was taken at this time. Lot 42 and 43, Block 4Wi 1_dridye_ Subdiv7_s_ion� _Shephard_ Resources, Conceptual Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that Doug DeChant, representing the owner of the property, is requesting conceptual design review for a single family home. The lot is zoned four-plex. So is Lot 43. Originally the proposed residence would straddle the common lot line between lots 42 and 43. However, the applicant is thinking PLANNING AND ZONING March 17, 1992 Page 7 of 10 COMMISSION MEETING MINU'ES Resources. of moving the building over so that it doesn't of-ect the lot lines. The building is a two and a half story building with a maximum height of 35'. The building has a floor area of abour 9,500 square feet, but that includes everything, garage, me,_nanical, storage, etc. The habitable area is around 7780 square feet. Exterior building materials are stucco and stone siding, wood windows, doors, trim, and the roofing material may be slate or cedar shake shingles. Other site materials include stone and boulder retaining walls and asphalt driveway, and outdoor spa. A conceptual drainage/grading plan and landscape plan have been provided. Formal landscaped areas are shown. The driveway will be nearly flat. However, there is a larje bermed area :ahind the house, which will screen the v:ew of the Allen residence. The grade of the berm is in excess of 50% and it will be difficult to revegetate a slope like that. The design guidelines state that no slope should be greater than 50%, without artificial retainage, therefore some sloped, terraced, boulder retaining walls will be more approoriate. Doug DeChant stated that the lot line adjustment has net vet been decided. He stated that the applicant has also considered a quality standard seam metal roof, as roofing material. The Commission informed the applicant that phis was not an acceptable roofing material for Wildridge. They are considering, also, a good quality synthetic slate. He stated that samples would be provided at a later date. He stated that the issue of the berm is of great importance to the owner. DeChant stated that the owner plans to saturate the site with landscaping. He stated that the owner has given him pretty strict criteria for views and glassed areas. He asked the Commission for their comments cn the south elevation. His concern is the massing in general and the large amount of glass. Considerable discussion followed on the elevations provided. DeChant stated that the owner is interested in using an aluminum window system on the large areas, which is a commercial system. Also discussed was the matter of the possible use of a commercial type greenhouse, i.e. the one at Rugs Pub. Jack Hunn stated that the more that this type of system is introduced, it will start to take on the appearance of a commercial building. The scale of this building is larger than the average building to date, and therefore, it will call a lot or attention to itself, and might start to look like the "Wildridge Clubhouse". Discussion followed on the massing of the roof. DeChant stated that there are dormers. Discussion followed on making some of the dormers in the gable form, rather than the hip forms. It was felt that this might break up some of the roof PLANNING AND 'ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES asMarch 17, 1992 Page 8 of 10 W Lot X12 and 43. Block 4. Wildrid_qeSubdivislon...Shephard_Resources, Conceptual Design Review, (cont) mass. Considerable discussion followed on this matter. Further discussion followed on the need for the berm. It was suggested that a drawing of the entire house be provided to give the Commission a feel for the entire house. It was suggested that, if the applicant is planning to make one, a massing model be provided. It was suggested that a wood greenhouse be provided, rather than an alminum one. Futher discus3ion followed on the hip roofs. Jack Hunn suggested the use of a landscape architect. The applicant stated that they may use Glen Ellison. The applicant asked if it would be allowable to install a woodburning fireplace on the outside, using the same chimney mass. Jim Curnutte stated that as drawn it looks like a fireplace (only one allowed by regulations). He stated that he would get an answer for the applicant later. Further discussion followed on the large wall of glass. It was suggested that the applicant try to find some other solution than the aluminum window. Discussion followed on the possible reduction of Lot 43 and me possible deduction in the number of units allowed on that lot if it is reduced in size. The applicant stated that the owner does plan, at some time in tre future, Lo build a smaller unit on that lot. Discussion followed on the slope of the berm, and it was felt that some retainage was needed. As this was a conceptual review, no formal action was taken at this time. Read i ng and ppro_v_a 1. of the _P I an, n i ng and _Zoning_ Comm i ss 1 or) Meet i ng Minutes -for-March _3, 1992. Patti Dixon moved to approve the minutes for the March 1992 meeting. Sue Railton seconded and the motion carried with .lack Hunn abstaining, since he was not a Commissioner at the time. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES March 17, 1992 a Page 9 of 10 s Other Business Patti Dixon inquired about the Streetscape, and if it would be coming back to the Commission. She stated that she was interested in getting involved, especially regarding the Avon Sign. Rick Pylman stated that it is really implementation of the street scape and urban design plan that was approved. Design review of a public road project isn't really typical for the Commission like a recreation center or parking garage would be. Dixon stated what she was really interested is the entrance sign of Avon. She said she thinks that the bridge and the color usea is terrible. Pylman stated that the signs would be something that the Commission could possibly look at. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 PM. Respectfully, submitted. Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary