Loading...
PZC Minutes 061692RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on June 16, 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, Sue Railton, Henry Vest, Jack Hunn, Rhoda Schneiderman Pati Dixon Staff Present: Jim Curnutte, Town Planner; Rick Pylman, Director of Community Development Charlette Pascuzzi, Recording Secretary All members were present except Sue Railton. Ms. Railton arrived at 7:�4 PM. Lot 3 Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision,._Suncrest Condominiums,_ Building Color Change Request Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that Randy Perry, on behalf of the Suncrest Condominium Association, is requesting design review approval to change the color of the four-plex building on Lot 3, Block 1. The cedar siding would receive a tan tone paint, the stucco would be a cloversweet white, and the doors, door trim and 3rd floor deck rails, but not the garage doors, would be a derby green. CUrnU�te stated that the applicant had color chips for the Commission review, and that the colors would be applied as an exterior latex paint. The applicant provided the color chips for the Commission's review. It was the general consensus of the Commission tnat the stucco color would be too bright and should be toned down. The applicant stated that they had chosen an alternate color, which was the eggshell color. The Commission felt that this would be a better color. Discussion followed on the matter of leaving the garage doors the current dark color. The Commission felt that the -" .0�% PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 2 of 30 Lot 3, Block 1, W'ildridge Subdiv_is_i_on,_ Suncrest_Condom7.nium, Building Dolor Chane Request, De- n.Review�_(cont) garage doors would have to be painted the tan tone. Patti Dixon moved to approve the color change with the change of the stucco color from the stark white to the eggsheiI #2H7P, that the garage doors would be painted the same taupe,# 2M45E, as the siding, and the trim color would be painted the derby green. #1D28C, as presented. Rhonda Schneiderman seconded. The motion carried with Jack Hunn and John Perkins voting nay. Holy Cross Electric Association, Line Relocation, SpecialRev,iew Use Amendment Public Hearing Rick Pylman stated that in 1987 the Town approved a special review use request from Holy Cross. He then pointed out on the map displayed where the Metcalf Road Substation is located (Holy Cross refers to this as the Beaver Creek Substation). He stated that there is an existing 69KV line that runs out of this station. He pointed out where the line runs to the Eagle -Vail Substation. The approval in 1987 was to upgrade this line to a 115KV line. Holy Cross has taken another look at their needs. Whac they are really trying to do is run a second 115KV line into Vail and have changed their request slightly from what was approved in 1987. They would like to change the alignment coming out of the substation, taking it a little further to the north. He pointed this new alignment out on the map. He stated that it is actually a better visual condition than what is currently approved. The other change to the 1987 approval is instead of ,lust upgrading this line from a 69KV to a 115KV, they would like to keep the 69KV to Eagle -Vail and also run the new line all the way into Vail. He pointed out what area they would remove the existing 69KV line, where it would be put on the same poles as the 115KV line. When the dual line reaches Buck Road, the 69KV line would drop down and go underground down Buck Creek Road, behind Pizza Hut, along SW1Tt Gulch Road, up Swift Gulch till it meets the existing line again. The 69KV will then run down to the Eagle -Vail station and the 115KV will split off and go on to Vail. Pylman stated that Staff has looked at this and has a couple concerns and a couple issues that they think need to be addressed. Staff has not had time to address these and get the answers yet. Staff is recommending tabling, because they do not feel that this application is ready for action. Pylman stated that Holy Cross wanted to go through with the public hearing, therefore he will go through the issues, as he sees them, that should be addressed, so that the Commission can understand where the Staff is coming from on this. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 3 of 30 ,__Special___Review Pylman stated that with Holy Cross doing some engineering work, planning work, and construction, the Staff would like to take an opportunity to work with them to see what could be ir,iproved irl the Avon area as far as the power lines go. Pylman described the lines running into and out of the Town. He feels that there are some opportunities to consolidate some of those. He pointed out on the map some of the lines that could be consolidated, therefore allowing for the removal of some of the poles along Metcalf Road, etc. Pylman stated that another question that has come up, that they haven't been able to address yet, is that representatives of the Wildwood/Mountain Star property, who is proposing development on the Wildwood property, would like to look at what epLions they have there, for working with Holy Cross to minimize the visibility of the lines that cross their access roads. He stated that they haven't had time to come up with answers on that issue yet. What Staff would like to do is work with Holy Cross and address some of these issues, see what the costs are, see what kind of participation we can have, and see if we can't take this opportunity to clean up every thing we have. While the new alignment that is proposed is a better visual condition than what we have, he feels that there are some real opportunities to improve it all across the board, and he feels that answers are needed before we can move forward with the proposal. Pylman stated that, if the Commission feels compelled to make a decision one way or another, Staff has made all these issues conditions of approval and feel that they should be conditions for approval if the Commission feels that they need to act on this proposal at this time. Again, Staff recommendation is to table it. Bob Ballinger stated that Walt Dorman, Richard Brinkly and Johnnie Kemp are all representing Holy Cross Electric. He provided some small maps that might be easier to look at. He stated that the green represents the new 115 second source, the yellow represents the existing 115 and the orange represents what has been called the 69KV line. He stated that there is a misconception on this, that is what the construction is, but it is only a distribution line running like a 24.4 voltage which is the same which goes around to all your homes, etc. It is really not a 69KV line at all. He then proceeded to describe that the power was generated Hayden and then runs down to Wolcott and to Beaver Creek Substation, all on a second source line. in other words there are two transmission lines serving all of that. From this point on it goes over to Eagle -Vail on a single 115 line. It then goes on over to Vail Substation. As mentioned before, Avon has looked at this before, and also Eagle County, but that was dropped for PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 4 of 30 Holy Cross Electric Association, Line Relocation. Special Review Use Amendment Public Hearing, (cont)_ various reasons, the major one probably was Colorado Ute running into financial problems. That is now resolved, so they are trying to move forward. The Forest Service looked at this back in 1987 and asked for an environmental assessment. Anyone involved had an opportunity to participate in that and give their opinions. There were a lot of conditions included in that assessment, such as the landscape of the towers, where they were placed, viewer conditions from the interstate, from the Town of Avon, from the ski resorts, etc. This line has 44 PI's which is nine miles long. That is a lot in power line construction. That had a lot do with keeping it at different angles so that you could not see a tunnel like effect. This line would probably be put up and maintained mostly with helicopters. It will be a steel type construction, so that the poles will be able to be put together in pieces, so that a smaller helicopter might carry them. The present 115 line is wood structures and there are no helicopters in this area that can deal with that type of weight. The maintenance would be done by helicopter a minimum of once a year. Mr. Ballinger stated that this line across the Town of Avon boundary also crosses two private parcels. In those private parcels, which goes across Buck Creek, the owners have been contacted, and Holy Cross will be using the same right-of-ways in that area. Everything except these two little parcels is on Forest Service property. Anything that Holy Cross has to go through a REA work plan, as they call it. That has been done and approved. They have received their environmental clearances from the REA and also the financing for the line itself. The cost line is 3.1 million dollars. There is work at each substation that would accommodate the line and that would come to another one and one half million. Mr. Ballinger reiterated that the 69KV line mentioned is not a 69KV line. it is constructed as such at this time, but is only used for distribution voltage. The proposal is to underbuild, called underhanging by Staff. He then pointed out on the maps where lanes would be located. He stated that they have a verbal agreement and written, non -recorded agreements with Mr. Nottingham that if the land, pointed out on the maps, is ever developed by him, or :anyone he assigns the property to, they will work with him and underground the distribution line through that area, which goes over nearly or to the Eagle -Vail Substation. That would eliminate any overhead construction in that area. Mr. Ballinger stated that the present 115 line, as mentioned before, would handle about 100 megawatts worth of load. The Beaver Creek Substation has a load of about 40 megawatts on it. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 5 of 30 Holy Cross Electric Association, Line_ Relocation,___Special _Review Use Amendment Public Hearing,__con The Avon/Eagle-Vail is about 15 megawatts and the Vail is about 54 megawatts. If there is a transmission line fault, say on the other side of the line where they had the second source, the chances are that no one would ever know the difference, because of the way the connects are made up and the controls in the substations. If the fault occurred beyond the Beaver Creek Substation, You would think that the Town of Avon would have no problem, but loads would then have to be fed with distribution voltage from this point on, so what would happen is that they would be able to handle about 1/4th to 1/2 of all the loads with the distribution line voltages, which means that there would be some power problems here in Town. He described some past power outages and their causes. Chairman Perkins asked Mr. Ballinger if he could specifically address the concerns that the Staff has. A lot of the data being presented is kind of going over the Commission's head. He asked that the applicant focus on the Staff concerns. The Staff has recommended tabling this item and he for one puts a lot of stock in what the Staff feels, so please specifically address the workings that would allow some of these things to perhaps go underground in Avon. You stated that you would work with Mr. Nottingham in the future to put his stuff underground, therefore, why are we rushing into this and will you work with the Town to put some of our things underground? Mr. Ballinger stated that they are willing to work with the Town and give them some ideas, but this line needs to go through. The costs and stuff, and environmental assessments take time. Their plan is to go ahead with this line and have these proposals so that this work could be done later. The have come up with a rough plan for the possibility of constructing a new line parallel to this and by doing that he showed on the map where a couple lines could be taken out. The rough cost to do that is between 600 and 900 thousand dollars. Another option would be to put a second line over to the 115 line (he pointed out the area on the map and showed where a line could be taken out at a rough price of 400 to 600 thousand dollars. Total cost of removing all lines describ is one and a half million dollars. He described some of the costs involved in not installing this line when the Wildwood area develops and costs for that area if the line is already in. It would also require another environmental assessment, etc. Richard Brinkly, Manager of Engineering for Holy Cross, stated that the last time they went through this with the Town they gave exactly the same inf oration to the Town relative to relocating PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 6 of 30 those lines as described. He stated that their position has not changed today from what it was last time. They are willing to do that, but it will be at the cost of the Town or whom ever wants to come up with the money to relocate those facilities. That facility was built long before the Town, long before the residential lots. It has a right and if it is moved its just like it is in any other place in the system, if you want it moved for whatever reason, its costs will have to be borne by whatever entity desires it to be relocated. In relationship to the 69 line, and the development of Mr. Nottingham's, that they would put that line underground, he would like to clarify that in that the agreement says that they would put it underground in the areas that he is going to develop. Essentially, what the agreement says is as we develop, his service would come from that and the undergrounding would be as part of the development, but it he doesn't develop certain sections of it, the whole thing would not disappear. Mr. Brinkly stated that he would like to address the rest of the Staff's recommendations. Regarding the necessity of retaining the existing 69 line, Bob made reference that it is a tie line and it is a distribution line, not a 69KV line. It is not a transmission line. It was the original transmission facilities that served this area, but is no longer used for that and will not be used as that in the future, it is a distribution line that provides service to this area. As it deals with the right to use that, and the reason that they never addressed it before, the right to use it and build at any distribution facility is covered in their franchise. He is not sure that the Staff looked at that aspect. The transmission line is the only aspect that deals with the special use permit. Any easement, and it also refers to the additional concerns that the Staff has with the proposed undergrounding of the 69 line, which is the last one before the Staff comments. The same thing exists, they are going to use the utility easement that exists within the development. Those fall under their right in the franchise to use any and all utility easements for distribution facilities. He feels that that is an area that the Staff did not cover and the whole underbuilding and the distribution facilities has nothing to do with this request. This request deals with the transmission facilities alone. As it deals with the undergrounding that has been requested by the representative of the Wildwood/Mountain Star property, they are essentially looking at underground costs which cost in the neighborhood of a million dollars a mile. What they have proposed is something like a mile and a half, which doesn't even include special right-of-way needL for a transmission line. You can't have other things in it. You can't have people digging in those PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 7 of 30 Holy Cross Electric Association�Line_Relocation, Soecial___Review Use Amendment, Public Hear_in�,_(con�j right-of-ways. There a lot of things that come with that, in addition to a tremendous trench and tremendous scaring, which obviously will not come back in this country. In addition to the million dollars a mile, it is about 250, 000 dollars on either end to get the special equipment to convert it from overhead to underground. If the developer is really interested, they could get down to the bottom line dollars. If we are in the same boat that they were in back in 87, then he thinks they are wasting a lot of peoples time going through a lot of things that, won't come about and he thinks this should be taken into consideration. Chairman Perkins then opened the public hearing. Peter Jamar, representing the partnership that is proposing to develop the Wildwood Subdivision that has been previously been subdivided and the revised development plans will be presented sometime later this summer. He stated that they are not here in any kind of an adversarial role with Holy Cross and he hoped that they do not perceive that they are. In fact he thinks that they had a very positive meeting with Bob Ballinger and Walt Dorman about a week or week and a half ago. He stated that he is a little discouraged by Mr. Brinkly's comments of telling them immediately why some of the things they want to investigate won't work. He pointed out, to explain their position, the Wildwood area and the access road that would service that subdivision, and showed that there is considerable interference from the existing and proposed transmission lines. He stated that their whole purpose in contacting Holy Cross and the Town was really to suggest. really no proposal, they certainly did not propose any undergrounding of lines at this point. They proposed merely an investigation of alternatives to what is currently being proposed and perhaps the suggestion for some remedial action in terms of the existing lines of the existing lines that are in place. He stated that they have been told, unless he had misunderstood, in the meeting a week or so ago that Holy Cross absolutely had no capability or experience in dealing with undergrounding power lines and that is certainly understandable given the rural nature of the Holy Cross area. They then suggested that, at our expense, would hire an independent electrical engineer to review what was being proposed. He thought that the statement that Chairman Perkins made regarding a lot of this being over our heads was a good statement. It is very difficult to understand in layman's terms the exact technical isues related to power transmission. He understood that Holy Cross really was not even capable with providing them with any alternatives that dealt with PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 7 of 30 Holy Cross Electric Associations Line Relocation,__Spe_cia_IRev iew Use Amendment_�ublic Hearing,__Lcont right-of-ways. There a lot of things that come with that, in addition to a tremendous trench and tremendous scaring, which obviously will not come back in this country. In addition to the million dollars a mile, it is about 250, 000 dollars on either end to get the special equipment to convert it from overhead to underground. If the developer is really interested, they could get down to the bottom line dollars. If we are in the same boat that they were in back in 87, then he thinks they are wasting a lot of peoples time going through a lot of things that won't come about and he thinks this should be taken into consideration. Chairman Perkins then opened the public hearing. Peter Jamar, representing the partnership that is proposing to develop the Wildwood Subdivision that has been previously been subdivided and the revised development plans will be presented sometime later this summer. He stated that they are not here in any kind of an adversarial role with Holy Cross and he hoped that they do not perceive that they are. In fact he thinks that they had a very positive meeting with Bob Ballinger and Walt Dorman about a week or week and a half ago. He stated that he is a little discouraged by Mr. Brinkly's comments of telling them immediately why some of the things they want to investigate won't work. He pointed out, to explain their position, the Wildwood area and the access road that would service that subdivision, and showed that there is considerable interference from the existing and proposed transmission lines. He stated that their whole purpose in contacting Holy Cross and the Town was really to suggest, really no proposal, they certainly did not propose any undergrounding of lines at this point. They proposed merely an investigation of alternatives to what is currently being proposed and perhaps the suggestion for some remedial action in terms of the existing lines of the existing lines that are in place. He stated that they have been told, unless he had misunderstood, in the meeting a week or so ago that Holy Cross absolutely had no capability or experience in dealing with undergrounding power lines and that is certainly understandable given the rural nature of the Holy Cross area. They then suggested that, at our expense, would hire an independent electrical engineer to review what was being proposed. He thought that the statement that Chairman Perkins made regarding a lot of this being over our heads was a good statement. It is very difficult to understand in layman's terms the exact technical isues related to power transmission. He understood that Holy Cross really was not even capable with providing them with any alternatives that dealt with PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 8 of 30 Holy :ross Electric Association, Line _Relocation_,_ Spec_ialRev iew Use Amendment. Public Hearing,_,�cont) undergrounding. Therefore, they proposed, at their expense, and the Town Staff has since agreed that they would be interested in expending and sharing those costs, to simply understand what the options were and what the costs might be. He stated that he agrees with the Staff that this needs to be tabled tonight and hjpefully come to some quick determination as to whether there are are alternatives that can be explored. He stated that they have heard the same numbers thrown out, that to bury a 115KV line would be approximately a million dollars a mile. He thinks that it is more like a half mile that they would be interested in at least looking at possibly burying in conjunction with their road. When you look at the cost of a half of a mile being 500,000 dollars, it will cost them several hundred thousand dollars to build the line overhead, the net difference to them is somewhere in the range of about 300,000 dollars. If they can get the line buried somewhere in that neihborhood, that peaked their interest. They are very interested in the scheme in a multi-million dollar development which will be Avon's high end residential oevelopment. That is certainly within the realm of a cost that they would consider bearing. Obiviously, until they know all of the costs and ramifications and whether it is even doable, the whole point is to just take a little bit of a time out here. They understand that no one wants to drag their heels and there is clearly an interest in getting this resolved quickly, but they feel that in the best interest of, not only their development, but in the long term of the quality of the Town of Avon, that this is something that will be with us for a long long time and if there are some opportunities to even over time, perhaps improve the existing situation and not repeat some of the things that have happened in the past, then lets at least know all the alternatives. They would encourage the Commission to definitely table this and hopefully it can be worked out. It was his understanding at the previous meeting th-i.t. Holy Cross was interested in working with us and understood that it was a good idea to hire some outside help that had some experience and pro-essional capability at looking at the feasibility of underground lines. With no further public input, Chairman Perkins closed the public hearing. Chairman Perkins stated that he thinks that this is clearly a matter that experts need to be discussing. It is a Staff issue at minimum and probably Staff with consultants. He stated that in light of the agenda for tonight, he would certainly entertain a motion to table, however he will hear the Commission comments first. PLANNING AND ZONING June 16, 1992 Page 9 of30 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES i__speci a l _,. Review Buz Reynolds agrees that this is something that should be investigated more. He stated that he was here for the meeting in 1987, and he thinks that there are a few other people in the room that were here at that time. He stated that he brought up a point at that meeting of the possibility of building the poles strong enough that they could be eventually take this line and attach it to that, through the Town of Avon's cost, (he pointed out the lines on the map). He stated that at that time he was told that you try to isolate the two lines separately so that if there was a lightening strike it would not take two lines down at the same time. Mr. Brinkly stated that there are two problems. If you put them on the same structure, essentially, what happens is that they provide the same service, so you might as well build only one line because you do not have any reliability and back up if a pole breaks. Any thoughts of putting two of the lines on the same structure is not acceptable to Holy Cross from a reliability issue. Even though it is a construction possibility, it does not answer the reliability issue. If you put them on different structures the reliability becomes better. Some parallelinq already exists, but they are on separate structures. Reynolds stated that he would like to leave this to Staff and get some consultants. Sue Railton agreed, as did Jack Hunn, Henry Vest, Rhoda Schneiderman, and Patti Dixon. ChairmanPerkins stated that he would entertain a motion to table this item. Walt Dorman reminded the Chairman that he had said that they would have the opportunity to respond. The Chairman asked that he be brief. Mr. Dorman stated that they want to get the facility constructed next year. In approving the alignment, if the developer desires to come up with the money and it can be worked out, they are more than willing to see what options and how it lays out. They have no objections to that. What they want is to get the alignment approved. If it works out down the road that the money comes in to cover putting the thing underground, they do not have a big objection to that. He does not think that is necessarily a problem in delaying it. They can continue to work with them, provide that information and come to a decision in three weeks. At least the process moves ahead. They have a lot of things that have to be approved and get done before fall comes, to where they can qet the thing bid and get into construction next year to meet the Fish and Game requirements and all of those things they have to meet. They are on an extremely tight schedule and they have already been put off two weeks because the Staff didn't have PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 10 of 30 things ready to begin with. He then turned to John Kemp, Attorney for Holy Cross for more comments. Mr. Kemp apologized for what he is about to do, because Holy Cross does not like to do business this way. As an attorney it is distasteful. Especially with all the criticism of attorneys, but the Staff has left him with no choice. They have completely misinformed the Commission. They have failed to put the whole situation in perspective. That perspective is this - We are going through this process as a courtesy to you, to try to work with you, cooperate with you. You have no regulatory power over us in this process". Mr Kemp stated he would explain why. All of the line except for the portion that passes through this parcel (he pointed out the parcel on the map) is on Forest Service land. He stated that he knew that the Commission didn't want a lot of citations read to them about legal cases, but, he assumed that this is being taped and your attorney, John Dunn, can check this out and advise you. Chairman Perkins asked if Mr. Kemp could possibly speak directly to John Dunn and spare the Commission of this action now. Mr. Kemp asked to explain. Chairman Perkins asked him to be brief. Mr. Kemp stated that he would be very brief. The case he had before hom is called "Citizens for a better Henderson vs. Hotel (? spelling)". It went to the United States Court of Appeals. In that case it says any regulations by a town on Forest Service land has to take back seat to what the Forest Service does. The Forest Service has already given them a permit. The County is giving them a permit for this. they are all set to go. They have a permit from 1987 across that little piece of private property, they have an easement for it, and they want to try to work with the town to try to make it as good as possible, but your Staff hasn't even pointed any of this out to you. Staff states on the second page of their report, ..to additional concern of the Staff is the proposed undergrounding of the existing 69KV line (which Richard has pointed out to the Staff and to you is really a 25KV line, it is a distribution line) at Buck Creek. No information has been submitted." He stated that they have told the Staff that they were going to go through Town easements in the streets and the regular easements. We have that right under our franchise with the Town of Avon. There is nothing here to regulate. We want to work with you. We can't even begin to come to terms with the Staff as long as it makes recommendations like it does here which would cost us millions of dollars in tearing down lines and rebuilding lines. Now if you have some concerns that they could work with you on, they would like to do it, tnat is why they are here. He stated that if the Commission tables this, his recommendation to his client is to take it as a no vote and to make a formal request to the Council PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 11 of 30 location,_ Special__ Review to proceed to make a final decision on this it taking your tabling as a no vote, and if they refuse to act on it, they will just g-) ahead with it anyway. Chairman Perkins stated that that is fine, that is their right. He stated that the Chair would entertain a motion. Peter Jamar stated that he would like to defend the Staff a bit. He stated that regarding the 69KV line being a 29KV line, that is what they have labeled on their maps and reports, so he didn't think that the Staff has necessarily out to lunch. lie thinks that they have done a good job following this and he thinks that the Commission is making the proper decision. Buz Reynolds moved to table this item. Henry Vest seconded. The motion carried unanimously. ahmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision_,_ Lyon Is Yard and Soil Storage.,__ Special Review Use Public Hearing Rick Pylman stated that there are some drawings on the wall for the Commission's review. Fie stated that Lyon's Trucks, Inc. is requesting a special review use to allow outside storage on Lots 14 and 15, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. That is the Industrial/Commercial district on Metcalf Road. The area is zoned industrial/commercial and as a special review use, contractor's yards and outside storage are allowed. The use, as requested, states that they would store six commercial vehicles, including front end loaders, and dump trucks. There would be an office trailer and storage of up to 500 yards of soil. An area between the storage use and Metcalf Road would be bermed to screen visibility of the site. The Staff has reviewed the application and has some concerns. There are three criteria for review of a special review use application. He stated that the proposed use is in compliance with all other requirements imposed by the Zoning Code. Regarding the conformance with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, The Metcalf Road subarea description identifies this area as a major entrance to the Wildridge Subdivision and recognizes some problems with the visual quality of the development that is going on there, some of the type of uses that exist there. One of the goals of the Comprehensive Plan states that a high quality visual image of the Town is established through both public and private sector activities. Objective "E" of that goal states "improve the appearance and image of the service district along Nottingham and Metcalf Roads, through enhanced design, screening of activities PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 12 of 30 and landscaping". Again, as the entrance to Wildridge, this part of Town is critical in the way it develops out. That is why we are trying to get rid of the power lines that run through there. We have some good, strong development going on in Wildridge and the appearance of Metcalf Road is very important and Staff is concerned about the way this application is presented and the way the use is structured. There are some contractor's vard that exist in that area now and one of them presents a very poor image and Staff is working to try to clean that up. The others are screened behind buildings and fences and are not as objectionable. Staff does not believe this request is compatible since, only a trailer is proposed as an office, there is no building being proposed on the site and he thinks that this goes against the typical development in that zone district where the primary use occurs in buildings, warehouse use, light manufacturing uses, even the storage uses that occur over there is occurring in buildings. Staff has some concerns with the outside storage of soil and stormwater runoff, erosion and dust problems that can be created through that storage, as well as general unsightlyness of it. Looking at the zone district, looking at the proposal, Staff thinks that not only is this proposal not strong enough itself, it is not screened well, it is not landscaped well, but the use is pretty heavy for what they look at as a light industrial district. Staff is encouraging uses to occur within buildings and good quality architecture and not outside storage of heavy equipment and soil. Staff recommendation is for denial as this is proposed. Rick Travers, representing Lyons Trucks, stated that they do realize that this a sensitive area as the entrance to Wildridge, and they want to make this an attractive project. They stated that they are very willing to work with the Commission and the Staff in order to construct appropriate berming, fencing, landscaping, to make this an attractive addition, considering it being an industrial/commercial zoned area. He stated that he wanted to stress that this is an allowed use under the commercial, industrial zoning, specifically it states that a construction office and storage is part of the intended use of this area and he fells that is important to keep in mind when considering this application. Staff agrees that they are in compliance with the Zoning regulations. In reading over the comments regarding the Comprehensive Plan, they seem to, in every instance, reference landscaping and screening and he wants to stress to the Commission that this is what they do plan. Not knowing that this plan was objectionable, they do not, at this time have a plan of landscaping, but they do want to work with the Staff to have PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 13 of 30 Lyons teview whatever we feel is appropriate to screen all these activities from the road. We already have a berm planned, and if appropriate, they would include a fence, trees, etc., whatever would be appropriate to screen these activities. Fie stated that they are trying to upgrade that area. The auto body shops have become, in essence, junk yards. It is very unattractive. There would be nothing 'like that in this project. All of the activities would be screened properly. With respect to the trailer, you see construction trailers being stored in front of Becks, there is other similar storage going on in that area. He stated that the activities are not heavy equipment as described in the staff report. There are approximately six vehicles, one back hoe, one back end loader, no large cranes, etc. He stated he doesn't consider these heavy equipment. He stated that he has given a letter to the staff stating that they will take any appropriate action regarding dust as a problem, because they will use tarps and/or watering it down. He stated that they have provided a drainage plan for the runoff, and will take any action necessary to mitigate any problems. Chairman Perkins then opened the public hearing. With no public input forthcoming, Chairman Perkins closed the public hearing. Chairman Perkins stated that the Commission can only act on the proposal they have been presented with. The applicant has spoken of what they will do, but it is not included, so cannot be acted upon. The Chairman asked if the applicant would prefer tabling this item at this time. The applicant stated he would like the item to be tabled. Jack Hunn moved to table this item. Henry Vest seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Lot 37/38 Block 2 Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. Beaver Creek West Entrance Center, Zone Change Request Public Hearing. and Conceptual Design Review Rick Pylman stated that the applicant has asked to withdraw this application. They no longer wish to pursue this project. Chairman Perkins asked if it would require any action and Rick Pylman stated that it did not. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 14 of 30 Lot 45, Block 3. Wildridge SubdivisionFront Yard Setback Variance Request, Public Hearing, and Conceptual Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that in conjunction with this application is a conceptual design review application. He stated that he would review the front yard setback request first. He stated that the applicant would like to develop this property with a duplex structure and is requesting relief from the required 25 foot front yard setback along West Wildridge Road. The encroachment is limited to the garage portions of both of the units. The lot itself is about an acre in size and the units are about 2600 and 2100 sq. ft. respectively, not including the garages. The applicant has stated that the variance is necessary to provide a reasonable driveway grade to the property. In addition, he cited that fact that in the original Wildridge design guidelines allowance for a variance of this nature, up to fifteen feet, or within ten feet of the front setback line, when certain conditions occur, and that is related to the property. Whenever a property has a slope between 20 and 30%, this sort of variance is kind of written into the original guidelines for Wildridge. Curnutte stated that he explained to the applicant that it is not the Town's responsibility to specifically enforce or carry out that particular document and he would need to meet the Town's guidelines and meet the Town's criteria. Curnutte reviewed the criteria for reviewing a variance request. He stated that on Lot 44, immediately to the west, Buz Reynolds residence, a large structure is being built. That lot has very similar grades and did not require a variance to accommodate a several thousand foot structure and large garage. The properies to the east are vacant at this time. Staff does not feel that the garage encroachment will have a significant effect on the future home owners of these lots. Curnutte stated that Lot 44 is meeting all of it's setback requirements. Since Lot 45 is not significantly steeper than Lot 44, it would not appear that relief from the strict enforcement of the setback requirement is necessary to achieve compatibility and uniformity of treatment among sites in the vicinity. He stated that there would not appear to be any negative upon light and air, distribution of population, transporation and traffice facilities, public facilities and utilities and public safety. Curnutte stated that after reviewing the application and reaching a decision, the Com,iission must cite the findings used as a basis for the decision. Staff recommendation is for denial of the variance request, stating that Staff feels that granting a variance will constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 15 of 30 Lot 45, Block 3. Wildridge Subdivision, Front Yard _.Setback Variance Request Public Hearing and Conceptual Design_ Review cont other properties classified in the same district and that the variance is not warranted since: 1. The strict, literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of this title; 2. There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the site of the variance that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone; 3. The strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would not deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. Curnutte stated that whatever the Commission decides a resolution will be prepared and presented at the next meeting for signatures. Mr. Vedder stated that he had no additional comments since Staff had pretty well covered all the bases. Buz Reynolds stepped down as a voting member of the Commission due to a conflict of interest. Chairman Perkins then opened the public hearing. With no public input to be heard, Chairman Perkins then closed the public hearing. Sue Railton stated that the applicant could go further forward on the lot in a southerly direction. The applicant stated that this is very true, but the land does pitch down at an average close to 30% which is pretty steep. Railton stated that it is only a two story house and it could be built stepping down the site. The applicant stated that there is, between the floor level, the main living level, which is aleady on the order of five feet below street level. From that level to the bedrooms below there is like eleven feet difference and it is still going to require five to seven foot foundation walls to support that lower level. There is a lot of verticality in a very limited amount of horizontal distance. Discussion followed on the proposed placement . Jack Hunn stated that he sees some positive attributes of what the applicant is requesting, trying to minimize the impact of the garage doors on the street. The applicant responded that his intention was to turn the garage doors away from the street. Hunn PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 16 of 30 ion_,_ _ _Front_ _Yard_ _ Set_baCk -onceptua) DesignRev ieW stated that this proposed solution would achieve more than the Town's minimum parking for each of the residential units. He stated that, on the other hand, part of the rational for a variance is to achieve a three :.ar garage, which is desirable, but not essential, on one of the units. He stated that he is not convinced that the applicant can't accomplish those without asking for a variance. He stated that he is not willing to say that he wouldn't support it with more information and further study, but at this time he is not convinced that a variance is the only solution. Henry Vest stated that those lots are very steep and the houses that are going up now, i.e. the Sherman duplex, has a very steep lot. Although this one is not as bad, he thinks it is good what the applicant has done with the sod roof over the garage. It makes the building actually beyond the 25 foot setback. It does achieve the garage doors not being visible from West Wildridge Road. He would support this variance request. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that, conceptually, she has a problem with the sod roof. She thought it was a large mound that is going to look ungaingly. She doesn't mind granting the setback, she just has problems with this large piece of sod, maybe it should be landscaped. Discusion followed. Patti Dixon stated that she had no problem granting this variance. Chairman Perkins stated that he has a problem with granting this variance. He stated that he agreed with Rhoda about the sod roof. He finds it incongruent with the hip roofs and generally not very well integrated with the rest of the house. Also, from a conceptual design review standpoint, he finds the pitch of the roof too shallow and the hip roofs generaly kind of forced. He feels that there are other solutions without granting this variance at this time, even though another solution might require a variance. As presented at this point in time he is not in favor of the variance. Henry Vest move to grant approval of the front yard setback variance, citing the findings A., B. and numbers 1 and 2 in C. Patti Dixon seconded. The approval was denied with Dixon and Vest voting for and Perkins, Schneiderman, Hunn and Railton voting nay. Jim Curnutte then reviewed the conceptual design for the Commission, stating that it is basically a two and one half story building, about 4,700 sq. ft. and the tile shingles would be some PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 17 of 30 Setback cont sort of cementitious tile with a dull finish. The siding will be a 1 x 6 tongue & groove cedar siding on about 25% of the wall area, and the other 75% would be finished with stucco. There would be cladded wood windows and stucco deck pilasters. With a conceptual design, Staff doesn't offer a formal recommendation, but would like to point out a couple things to the applicant. They are that the the building height maximum is thirty five feet and this application exceeds that height. Those portions of the concrete driveway thresholds and lanterns located at the utility easements will need review and approval from all utility companies prior to the issuance of a building permit.. Discussion followed on the canterlevering on the the lower floor, the way the sod roof is not intergrated into the landscaping, and the pitches of the roof. It was suggested that steeper pitched roofs would help the massing and perception of this project. Sod should be used on flat roofs not sloping. The image of the house, from the street, could be improved. It was suggested that trees or wildflowers be used on the sod roof. The applicant reminded the Commission that he already has a height problem and with a steeper roof it would be more aggravated. Discusssion followed on how the applicant might correct the overage on the height. Discussion followed on the possibility of the height level being corrected by stepping down the house. Buz Reynolds returned as a voting member of the Commission. Jim Curnutte stated that the Commission reviewed this at conceptual level at the last meeting. He stated that both the conceptual and final design plans are provided so that the Commission can see how the project has changed since conceptual review. Curnutte stated that the residence will be accessed by a 14' wide driveway, which was one of the Commission's comments at conceptual review. The driveway approaches the house at about a 5% grade from the northeast. A landscaping/grading/drainage plan has been provided. The building is a two story residence, 2100 sq. ft. in size, the building height is 26' maximum, there is a gas fireplace in the living room. Materials being used are Timberline Ultra asphalt shingles in a slate blend; 1 x 6 cedar siding, stucco located at the chiment only, 1 x 4 and 1 x 10 cedar fascia, cedar plywood soffits, clad casement windows and a wood deck. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 18 of 30 dencz_,_ _ Fina l Curnutte reviewed the criteria for considering a final design review. He stated that the driveway grades on the north side of the drive, near the entrance, exceed the maximum allowable of 50%. Curnutte stated that the applicant has made an attempt to address all of the Commission's concerns from the conceptual review The applicant has amended his elevation drawings to fit the house in better with the existing topography, however this has notbeen reflected on the site plan, so that will have to be amended. Staff recommends approval of this application with the following conditions: 1. The grading/drainage/landscape plan be amended to reflect the slope along the sides of the house and reduce the slope along the northeast corner of the driveway. The new plan will then be subject to approval by the Town Staff when he applies for a building permit. Mr. Brennand stated that he would be happy to supply the revised grading/drainage/landscape plan. Discussion followed on the changes that had been made, and whether the driveway grade could be corrected. Discussion followed on the landscaping and the colors to be used which would be the transparent cedar coloring with white trim and a slate color roof. Discussion followed on maybe changing the roof line. The applicant stated that he would rather not and would rather not use the weathered wood color shingles as suggested. Chairman Perkins stated that he did not like this house. He feels that it does not reflect the level of design quality that he, as one commissioner, would like to see in Wildridge. Henry Vest moved to approve the final design review with the Staff conditions. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded. The motion carried with John Perkins and Jack Hunn voting nay. Rhoda Schneiderman stepped down as a voting member of the Commission due to a conflict of interest. Jim Curnutte stated that one of the comments made at conceptual design review was that "the exposed foundation walls must be PLANNING AND ZONING June 16, 1992 Page 19 of 30 COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Lot 38-A Block 2, Wildridge Subdivisions_ Maroney Residence, Material Change Request (cont) covered with some type of finish material and stucco is suggested". At final design review the following building materials were approved: 10" round log siding Stucco siding on all exposed concrete Woodruf singles Aluminum windows On October 15, 1991, the applicants received design review approval to change their roof material from woodruf to asphalt shingles. The applicants are now proposing to change the approved stucco material on the exposed concrete to paint. Pat Maroney stated that there is very little exposed concrete from any of the roadways. The intention of the change is to simplify the finalization of the house. There is no reason for putting stucco on a small portion of the house. Discussion followed on how much of the foundation is visible from the road. Buz Reynolds stated that he would have to see a portion of it painted before he could approve the change. The applicant stated that they intend to match as closely as possible the logs. He provided a chip of the closest color they could find. Jack Hunn stated that he thinks that this is a very visible aspect of the house from the road. He stated that this is a very high quality home and to make this change on the last 5% of the exterior of the home would be detrimental to the final product. He would prefer to see a coiitrast of colors, rather than the same color of the logs, and a stucco finish. Jack Hunn asked about the meter where the driveway meets the street. Mr Maroney staled that this was the meter for the home. Mr. Hunn then asked Staff it that was consistent with the previously approved plans? He stated that it was his understanding the the meters were to be on the homes. Rick Pylman stated that he believes that the guidelines state that the meters should be on the homes and screened if possible. Henry Vest stated that he thinks that the applicant should stick with the originally approved stucco. Patti Dixon stated that she thinks it should be stucco. Considerable discussion followed on the stucco adding some texture and also the durability of the stucco. It was felt that paint on concrete is not a good long term solution. Discussion followed on whether someone could tell the difference from the road. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 20 of 30 i_dence,. Henry Vest moved to deny the material change request for Lot 38-A, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision, Maroney residence. Patti Dixon seconded. Under further discussion Gail Maroney asked if it would be alright if they just brushed the concrete and paint it? Jack Hunn stated that there is a process called parging, which is a single coat troweled on application, which may be appropriate. Further discussion followed on this being a quality house and the matter of applying quality material to the exposed foundation. Henry Vest amended his motion to include that the originally approved color and textures be used. Patti Dixon seconded the amendment. The motion carried with Sue Railton and Buz Reynolds voting nay. Bristol Jim Curnutte stated that the applicant received final design approval and fractionalization approval for this project on March 19, 1991. The project involves two buildings, a six-plex and an eight-plex. The staff report presented on March 19, 1991 specifies the following exterior building materials: - Redwood and Stucco siding - Cedar shingles - Aluminum clad windows - Metal deck railings - Spherical pendant lights Curnutte stated that during the meetins one of the Commissioners specifically asked the representative of the applicant if indeed redwood siding would be used. Mr. Donaldson stated that since they were considering a solid body stain for the siding, they did not want to tie themselves down or specify redwood in particular, but stated that it would be some type of wood siding. In early May Mountain Coast Homes submitted a building permit application for this project. During the review of the project Staff noted a number of changes being proposed to the project. He stated that the amount of stucco above the garages has been significantly reduced, the pendant lights have been removed, some fenestration changes, etc. Staff feels pretty comfortable with those changes, however a couple issues came up with regard to the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 21 of 30 Lot 70 Block i, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision. B. - siding specifically and the shingles. The request before the Commission at this time is, in Staff's opinion, a change. The applicant has stated that they believe that the original approval did allow for masonite siding. Curnutte stated that he had listened to the tapes of that meeeting and it is not real clear. The word masonite does not come up, yet they specifically say that if it isn't redwood it would be some other type of wood siding. Staff felt that, rather make that decision at Staff level, they would present it to the Commission. The apDlicant wants to change from a natural board siding to a masonite siding. The second change is a change from cedar shingles that were approved to a Timberline 360 lb per square, in a weathered wood. Mark Donaldson stated that Michael Waste of Mountain Coast Homes has prepared two siding samples for review. Donaldson stated that they have discovered that the existing buildings are actually cedar. He stated that there is actually a little more wood grain texture in the masonite siding, and the colors are very close. Discussion followed on this color not matching the existing buildings. Donaldson stated it is their intention to paint the existing buildings to match this project. Regarding the change to asphalt shingles, they feel that because of the nature of the contemporary design of the roof forms and the mixture of ;materials, this is one of the more appropriate applications for the asphalt shingles. They feel it is a worthy product in terms of fire insurance ratings, safety, etc., and more importantly, durability. They are proposing the weathered wood shingle because that is very close to the natural color that wood shingles weather to in this environment. Jack Hunn stated that the applicant gained the approval of this Commission on the strength of a pretty good design that related well to the existing building. In his view, the materials of the one that they are so close to, matching the materials on the proposed building was the important aspect in his support of this project as a fractionalized project. He refered to the letter received from Jeff Maddox, representing the Beacon Hill Homeowner's Association, which states that they do not support these changes from cedar shake to asphalt and to a masonite from a real wood siding. He stated that he tends to agree with those people. He stated that he doesn't see any merit to this change, but detrimental to the adjacent and existing properties. Another issue is the proposal to reduce the amount of stucco area and to eliminate the light Fixtures and to continue, in his view, take quality out of the project. He stated he would have difficulty supporting the reduction of stucco. He feels that they should also reconsider the deletion of the light fixtures. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 22 of 30 Mark Donaldson stated that these changes were made to try to clean up some of the lines around the building, and the removal of the pendant fixtures were a bit of a problem in terms of the wind blcwing them. What they have done is gone to a recessed lighting because they want those stairways and entry ways to be well lit along with the garage fronts. 13ue Railton stated that she does not mind the masonite siding or the asphalt shingle roof. Buz Reynolds stated that he did not mind either of those, but he felt that the stucco gave character to the building and actually broke up a lot of the massing. Donaldson stated that the project was originally designed to be a manufactured housing product which required about another 12 inches of floor to floor height. In going back to the stick building version the heights were reduced and they do not have the height they once had from the garage floor slab to the underside of the soffit above, so it changed the scale and it didn't seem to be a massive enough application of stucco to be as meaningful as it was before. Patti Dixon stated that she had no problem with either change. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that she has no problem with the changes as long as the people in the existing building agree to being painted the same color. Henry Vest stated that he does not have a problem with the masonite siding and was about half and half regarding the asphalt shingles. He mentioned the letter from Jeff Maddox. Jack Hunn asked the applicant if they had permission from Beacon Hill regarding sharing an easement or shared use of a parking lot. Donaldson stated that there was a variety of cross agreements, regarding access, utilities, in fact part of the agreement to settle between the existing homeowners association and the developer was that there was about $10,000.00 given to them for the repainting of their building. Jack Hunn asked if gaining those approvals from the homeowners association was in part due to the materials proposed for the new building and the fact that they have taken exception to the proposal presented tonight, that they might not have been inclined to grant those easements, had the original proposal included these changes. Donaldson stated he did not think so. There were about seven or eight major issues that they dealt with and when it came down to it, the density was PLANNING AND ZONING June 16, 1992 Page 23 of 30 _. COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES the largest issue. The homeowners association and developer sat down and struck agreements on all counts at that time. There were the easements, the utility connections on one anothers property, drainage, their replacing the entire parking lot, and the developer has made substantial concessions in payments. Donaldson stated That he did not agree with Jeff Maddox's letter that they are regressing. He thinks that the samples appear to be very strong and are very similar in nature as far as the siding. The building design is somewhat different. When you consider that the buildings will be over 100 feet away from the street and three and four stories high, with very small portions of roof exposed at one time, the asphalt roofing is a very insignificant part of the design. John Perkins stated that he had no specific problems with the materials, but what he hates to see is a break in the relationship with the existing homeowners association. He feels that there can be problems. Discussion followed on the suggestion that this item be tabled until clearer information can be received from the homeowners association. The applicant stated that this would cause delay in the issuance of the building permit. Jack Hunn stated that he feels strongly that the project should be built as originally proposed. Jack Hunn moved to deny the requested material change for Lot 70, Block 1, Benchmark Subdivision based on section 6.00 of the design guidelines and specifically section 6.16 - that no improvement be so dissimilar to others in the values that values monetary or aesthetic would be impaired. John Perkins seconded. The motion to deny failed with a 2 to 5 vote. Rhoda Schneirderman moved to table this application until the July 7 meeting, but not to withhold building permits, and that the applicant meet with the owners of the adjacent townhomes and get actual feedback as to whether or not this is objectionable and some sort of written feedback be provided at the next meeting. Henry Vest seconded. Hunn asked Staff if they would issue a building permit under these conditions. Rick Pylman stated that the only way a building permit would be issued is with the understanding that the building PLANNING, AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 24 of 30 will be constructed as approved, and if no changes are approved, it is to be built according to the original approved plans. Perkins stated that it will be a while before the applicant gets to this stage of construction, therefore they could proceed at this time. The motion carried unanimously. 's Restaurant__and Jim Curnutte stated that Jim Morter, representing Kevin Killham, is requesting conceptual design review of a Denny's restaurant on the corner of Avon and Sunroad roads. He stated that that property was formaly 3 lots with the bank on one lot and the other two lots were vacant. It has been resubdivided to create a new public road through there and the property is now five lots, with the bank on one of them, and the bank has purchased another one immediately west of their parking lot. The post oFfice has purchased a large lot over by the Comfort Inn, and there are two lots, north of Sunroad and west of Avon Road that are left. This proposal is proposed for those two lots. Both lots are slightly over half an acre in size. They are zoned Town Center, which is the most urban zone district. If this project receives final design review approval, the applicants will vacate the lot line between the two lots. Curnutte stated that the development consists of a one story restaurant, about 5000 sq. ft. in size, and an attached commercial building. The commercial portion of the buil,-ing is about 2,500 sq. ft., a one story building located on the north side of the restaurant. Curnutte stated that the owners do not intend to build the commercial portion immedaitely, but Staff wanted to look at what is being proposed, so they asked the applicant to show that building on the elevation drawings and the site plan. Since they are not going to build the commercial building right away, they have provided an alternate north elevation drawing. Curnutte stated that, assuming that the commercial building will be used for retail purposes, and assuming that the dining area of the restaurant were a certain size, the minimum required parking spaces would be 41. The site plan shows 52 on the site, including 4 handicap spaces. When these spaces are combined with other impervious materials, such as sidewalks, loading areas and the building itself, the total impervious surface is approximately 77% of the entire property area. This is slightly under the 80% allowed in this zone district. In addition to the parking spares PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 25 of 30 Lots 2 and 4. Sunroad Subdivision Denny's Restaurant and Commercial Building, Conceptual Design Review, (cont) there is a driveway that loops all the way around the building. The applicants state that this is necessary for loading access. There is loading at the back and it is indicated that the trash related to the restaurant will be stored inside the loading area, however there is nothing on the site plan to show where the trash from the commercial building will be stored. The roof material on the building was proposed as balast, however the newly submitted plans show a different roof. Mechanical equipment needs to be exposed to the air, and will be screened with stucco walls. The building walls will be covered with stucco and split faced block. The windows and doors will be aluminum. There will be three signs on the building and will be located on the north, east and south. Each sign is 2 x 14, or 28 sq. ft. each. They will be individual letters with metal returns and yellow plexiglass faces. Yellow is Denny's standard sign color. They will be internally illuminated. There are no signs proposed for the commercial portion of the building at this time. There is a monument sign located near the corner of Sunroad and Avon Road. This sign would be no higher than 8 ft. and would display only the Denny's name and not any portion of the retail areas. It would be an internally lit, yellow plexi -glass faced box sign on a stone pedestal. Curnutte stated that Staff doesn't make formal comments at conceptual, but there are some concerns. He stated that Staff feels that it is a good idea to review the entire project up front, even though it is going to be built in phases. Staff does he a some concerns with the phasing of this project and that has to do with the retail pad being finished with grass for now and just left for who knows how long. Staff suggests that that area be used to satisfy some of th parking requirements that Denny's would like to have, at the very least their excess parking. Also, additional windows need to be added to the north elevation. More detailed information needs to be provided on the signage at final design review stage. Staff suggests that a model of the proposed building be submitted at final design review. More specific information should be provided regarding trash storage related to the commercial part of the building. The applicant should consider reducing the overall amount of impervious surface on the property, by reducing the parking spaces or working with the building to allow the loading berth to be accessed without such a large sweeping driveway. Also, the landscape plan should be coordinated with the existing plans for Avon Road and the post office property. A rather extensive and mature landscape treatment is suggested. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 26 of 30 Jim Morter stated that when he was approached with this project they were presented with the stock Denny's building that you would see on West Colfax, etc. They then sat down with Staff and discussed the Town's concerns and fortunately common concerns were shared. The first concern is that it not appear to be a franchise building. It needs to be recognizable as a Denny's, but hopefully one of the better Denny's. The second concern was the design of the roof as it was presented, and that was a flat roof with mechanical equipment sitting on top of it and the dreaded little mansard roof around the peremiter of the building. The third concern had to do with materials. The concrete block is more appropriate on the other side of Avon Road than in the Town Center, so they have deleted any exposed concrete block. He stated that the applicant is proposing an extensive and mature landscape plan around the perimeter of the site. They have approximately 12 to 18 ft. of landscape area,which does allow them to do some berming as well as planting materials. They have also provided more landscape area adjacent to the building. Mr. Morter stated that there is a possibility of a 2500 sq. ft. retail building being attached. He did not show it on the model he brought or on the elevations he brought. He stated that the mechanical equipment does have to be exposed to the air. This building will be viewed from above to a certain degree as you move up and down I-70, it will be viewed as you get off at the highway exit, it will be viewed from the top floors of Avon Center and potentially other buildings to be developed in the Town Center. To handle this, they are basically creating a well in the middle with parapet walls that will be in the range of eight feet high above the roof surface. He is convinced that they will be able to screen the mechanical equipment. He stated that he thinks cney want to get a little steeper with the roof slope than what is shown on the model Probably two values of the same color, probably a neutral color, possibly in the grey/beige range, will be proposed. The sloping roof will be a metal roof. He will provide a sample of what will be proposed. It will be a non glare, flat matte roof. Morter stated that he had been mistaken when he informed Staff that the letters were yellow. The letters are red and in some cases where they do a background it is yellow. He would like to stay pretty subtle 1,ith the building colors given the colors of the signs. Discussion followed on the signage sizes. Regarding the signage for the commercial building, he is assuming that two presentations will have to be made. One will be the original and another will be for the completed version. Considerable discussion followed on the screening of the mechanical equipment, the landscaping, and the solution of the two PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 27 of 30 and phase building. The matter of putting a retail space and a restaurant together was discussed and it was felt that they are not really compatible or needed in that location. It was felt that the site plan would be improved with the deletion of the proposed commercial building. It was also suggested that the applicant approach the highway department to get permission to put additional landscaping in highway right-of-way. Discussion followed on the snow accumulation in the mechanical areas with the walls around them. It was suggested that maybe the introduction of stone would help the exterior appearance. Jim Morter stated that it is conceivable that they could maybe use some store, but he doesn't want to use it just as an accent. Jim Curnutte stated that Larry and Chris Pardee are requesting conceptual design review. The lot is about 3/4 of an acre in size. The building is a two story log home, but a substantial portion of the lower level is below grade. The maximum building height is about 25'. A two car garage is located in the lower level and is incorporated into the building's overall design. The living area is about 3,000 sq. ft., including the unfinished basement, but not the garage. There is a large deck (12 x 52 ft.) located along the rear of the house. Exterior building materials are logs, stucco, river rock, vertical cedar siding, 1 x 6 trim, asphalt shingles, and wood doors and windows. The driveway will be finished with asphalt. No grading /drainage or landscape plan has been provided and the reason for that is that the applicant has indicated that they are more interested in hearing the Ccmmission's comments about the building's proposed architecture and materials at this time. The applicant stated that did not have anything to add to the staff report. He did say that the drive was drawn in by hand, but he hats an engineer from the Town of Vail working on it for him, and he has a landscape engineer working on that also. Discussion followed c,n the locations of the river rock and the stucco. Discussion followed that there should be some added interest on the street side elevation. Discussion followed on the driveway and a turnaround area. The applicant stated that that has been taken into consideration. Discussion followed on the roofing material. The applicant stated that his first choice would have been a m=tal roof, but he is aware that the Commission has problems with this type roof. He stated that he doesn't really have any thing against cedar shakes other than they are PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 28 of 30 expensive and they would have to be replaced in ten or twelve years. Asphalt shingles are what he can afford. It was the general consensus that, with some added interest on the street side, this would be 2n attractive addition to the area. Lot 95 Block 1. Wildridge Subdivision Gossett Duplex, Conceptual Design Review Jim Curnutte stated that Dave Gossett is requesting a conceptual design review on a duplex. The lot is about a half acre in size. The property slopes toward the west at about 17%. The proposed building is a two and a half story high building, however a substantial portion of that lower floor is below grade. Maximum buildin( height is about 28'. A two car garage and mechanical storage area is located at the lower level of both units, and the living area is on the second floor and that is about 2,000 sq. ft. The applicant hasn't decided if he will go with a gas or woodburning fireplace. All driveway areas will be asphalt. Proposed building colors will be presented at the meeting. Exterior building materials include Timberline asphalt shingles - slate color, 1 x 8 channel rustic cedar siding, stucco, rough sawn cedar fascia, metal clad wood windows, wood deck with peeled aspen log railings, and copper on chimney caps and possibly bay windows roof. A conceptual grading and landscaping plan has been received. The overall amount of landscaping on the property appears to be very minimul. Showing native vegetation at all areas around the house and driveway seems unrealistic and the applicant agrees that the next plan will better. Staff also feels that when this comes in for final it should be submitted at least at 1/4 scale. Jack Hunn stated that he thinks that the Staff has aaequately addressed the site issues and landscaping issues. He stated that he is most concerned with the north elevation. The applicant has made an attempt to add interest by changing materials on this long wall plane. That side of the building needs to change the plane. Dramatic changes in the massing of the building needs to be done on that side. The building also becomes very tall as viewed from the road. Discussion followed on this matter. Hunn stated that most of the concern he has is regarding the massing. Rhoda Schneiderman stated that both the east and north elevations bother her. The front has all this activity, windows and doors etc., and then there are the two sides that are totaly void of any kind of interest. The long driveway needs some interest added, i.e. landscaping. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 29 of 30 'on. Gossett Duplex, Conceptual. Henry Vest had concerns regarding the two rectangular windows on the southwest side. He felt that a better solution might be found for this element. He also felt the something needed to be done with the long north elevation. Patti Dixon stated that she also had problems with the east and north elevations. She felt that more landscaping was needed, especially at the driveway. Buz Reynolds also stated that the north and east elevations need more character. Sue Railton stated that she didn't like the design at all. The windows look as if you have one special of every size just splattered around the house. Chairman Perkins stated that he echos the comments by his fellow Commission members. He feels that there is a lack of a concept. He would encourage the applicant to maybe start over with a design concept that a building could grow with some interest. The massing is just not acceptable from his standpoint. Reading and Approval of the Plar;ing and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes for May 19, 1992 Henry Vest moved to approve the minutes for the May 19, 1992 meeting as submitted. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Sue Railton moved to approve the minutes of 'the June 2, 1992 meeting as submitted. Jack Hunn seconded and the motion carried unanimously. Other Business Buz Reynolds moved to approve resolution 92-05, A Resolution Granting A Variance From The Side Yard Building Setback Requirements For Lot 26, Block 1, Parcel 2, Wildridge Subdivision. Rhoda Schneiderman seconded, and the motion carried with Henry Vest abstaining. Sue Railton moved to approve resolution 92-06, A Resolution Granting A Special Review Use To Allow For The construction Of A Church On Lot 45, Block 1, Benchmark At Beaver Creek Subdivision. Henry Vest seconded, and the motion carried with John Perkins abstaining. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES June 16, 1992 Page 30 of 30 Other Business cont John Perkins asked the Commissioners if they would feel comfortable if the Staff approved a change in the railing colors for the Christie Lodge from black to white. The Commissioners agreed that this would be batisfactory. Rick Pylman reported that, at the Town Council Worksession on Tuesday, June 23, 1992, a joint meeting to talk about design review issues, has been scheduled. He will contact all Commission members with the time, once the agenda is set. The matter of how Holy Cross could go to the Council to ask for a reversal of a motion to table was discussed. Jack Hunn moved to adjourn at 11:20 PM. Respectfully, submitted. Charlette Pascuzzi Recording Secretary ,f.A0q