Loading...
TC Minutes 10-28-1997i E MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE TOWN COUNCIL HELD OCTOBER 28, 1997 - 5:30 P.M. A regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Avon, Colorado was held in the Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, Colorado, in the Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order by Mayor.Jack Fawcett at 5:31,PM. A roll call was taken with Councilors Jim Benson, Richard Carnes, Bob McIlveen, Buz Reynolds, Sr., and Buz Reynolds, Jr. present. Mayor Protem Judy Yoder was absent. Also present we're Town Manager Bill Efting, Assistant Town Manager Larry Brooks, Towne Clerk Patty Lambert, Town Attorney John Dunn, Town Engineer- Norm Wood, Director of Recreation Meryl Jacobs, Special Events Coordinator Dana Maurer, Fire Chief Charlie Moore, Director of Community Development Mike Matzko, Town Planner-Karen'Griffith, Administrative Assistant Linda Donnellon, and Administrative Assistant Jacquie Halburnt, as well as members of the press and public. Citizen Input: Recreation Center Expo Update Special Events Coordinator Dana Maurer reviewed the upcoming Recreation Center Expo. In celebration of the-Recreation Center. 's second anniversary, the Expo,,is a .free, day on, ,Friday; November 7th from 9:00am to 8-:00pm. Mayor Fawcett complimented Dana and'Director of Recreation Meryl Jacobs on the wonderful job_they d-id on the "Haunting". Citizen Input: Allocation of Business Registration Funds Mark Weinreich, of Venture Sports, requested Council to earmark the Avon Business Registration Fund towards marketing or' supporting the Avon Businesses. Mayor Fawcett mentioned all, of the Town's special events are to entertain the residents in the valley, as well as support the' local businesses. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. noted the Town does contribute to the Tourism Board and the Chamber. Councilor Carnes estimated the Town's business registration to amount to $10,000 to $12,000. The business registration fees go into the'general fund and the special events, Tourism Board;-and the Chamber funds are paid from the general-fund.. Councilor Carnes noted Vail's business license revenues are around $375,000, which is a big difference from Avon's. Councilor Carnes added that the Town does use the business registration fees towards marketing but, not in a direct fashion. Mr. Weinreich thought the Marketing Board targets mostly Vail and not so much Avon. Councilor Benson responded that is why they ask the Town for so much and the Town gives them less. Councilor McIlveen suggested forming an Avon Business Association. Councilor Carnes reminded there was an Avon Merchants Association several years ago. That is where "Bob the Bridge" came from. Mr. Weinreich asked the Town to organize a business association and volunteered to help. Mr. Weinreich thanked the Council for their time. Citizen Input: Eagle River Water and Sanitation District Mr. Dennis Gelvin, general manager of the Eagle-River and Water Sanitation District, gave an update on how they-are doing in their efforts to control odors at the Avon wastewater facility,, Mr. Gelvin informed an additional odor scrubber was,placed in service three weeks ago and seems to be working very well-is the same piece of equipment that was in place from April through June. Work is under way to prepare for the arrival of a new'odor scrubber that is being built in San Diego. The'new scrubber is expected to be here in about three weeks. That will replace the scrubber in use now, with twice the capacity. Over the next couple of months there may be brief periods that outside odors may occur, when equipment is off line for installation and servicing. Mr. Gelvin informed they are going back to using very corrosive and hazardous equipment that uses concentrated sulfuric, acid and concentrated hypo chloride. They will continue to research and experiment with new technologies.. Testingwill.be` on a smaller scale, then this summer, when they tested•at full-, scale. Mr. Gelvin thought it possible to get the work done by Thanksgiving. The new scrubber will cost $142;000•:,,' Per the Town's Ordinance, Mr. Gelvin will continue to keep Council updated. Mr. Gelvin expects'the new scrubber to handle the needs for the build out of the plant. Citizen Input: Appeal of P & Z Decision / Final Design Approval Lot 19, Block 4, Wildridge Michael Schneider stated he is appealing the denial of the final design for Lot 19,'Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision which occurred on October 21st. Mr. Schneider stated his denial was based on the fact that he supposedly did not meet the design review criteria number four, which is the compatibility of the proposed improvements with the site,topography. Mr. Schneider stated he felt, as well as his•licensed engineer, that the site is compatible with the topography and would be-minimally altered to accommodate, the structure. Mr. Schneider thought it important to take into consideration that the lot is pie shaped and there is only one location which a structure could be built upon the lot. The lot is zoned duplex and Mr. Schneider chose to put a single family structure on the lot as he thought .it seemed more environmentally friendly and compatible with neighboring houses. Mr. Schneider stated he took all surrounding.lot views and solar corridors into consideration and mentioned he'stayed 3 1/2' lower than the 35' height allowance to accommodate those issues. Mr. Schneider added that staff has stated he is violating the Town's steep slope guidelines, which states; building sites.that contain slopes in excess of M . Mr. Schneider noted his building pad location is on average 18%. Mr. Schneider distributed, to Council, a letter-from his engineer. Mayor Fawcett asked if the letter was presented to P & Z. Mr. Schneider stated no, this came after his denial. Mayor Fawcett asked Town Attorney John Dunn if there was a problem with Council looking at the new material, that was not presented to P & Z. 2 Attorney Dunn responded there is no problem with Council looking at it. Council, on the basis of it, can remand the matter to P & Z or take it into consideration and reach their own decision. Mr. Schneider added that he had his engineer write the letter based upon his denial so, that is why Mr. Schneider did not bring it because, Mr. Schneider didn't think he.was going to be denied. Mr. Schneider felt he did not fall into the steep slope guideline criteria and therefore felt there were'no conflicts with the steep slope guidelines. Mr. Schneider.felt,he should not be subjected to.these. Mr. Schneider stated he has adhered to staff's requests over and over by eliminating the north side walk-out, as well as the snowmobile garage door on the north side, thereby leaving the grade at existing on the north side walk-out, i.e. less disturbance. Mr. Schneider agreed to add more trees and re-vegetate with native sage brush on the north side. And, with these changes, he also eliminated two retaining walls. This was done upon Karen's request, as-Mr. Schneider _ stated he was trying to work with her. Mr. Schneider informed all of his retaining walls are 1' to 4' and made of landscape boulders which is a very minimal height for retaining walls in Wildridge. Mr. Schneider noted that Sue Railton_voted in favor of the project. Mr. Schneider reminded that Ms. Railt.on has,-been on the DRB for over'8 years and her business is architecture.' Mr. Schneider added Ms. Railton is very conservative. Mr. Schneider noted that in the P & Z minutes,- Ms. Railton stated that his project does not fall into the steep slope guidelines. Mr. Schneider noted that Commissioner Mike Dantas on the P & Z is a builder in the Wildridge area. Mr. Schneider thought Mr. Dantas is very familiar with steep slope guidelines and Mr,. Dantas voted in favor of his project. Mr. Schneider added that this will be the 5th single family home that he has built in Wildridge. This one is very similar to his last personal residence at 5690 Wildridge Road East, where the slopes and width of the lot are similar. Mr. Schneider noted he had none of these issues come up when that house was approved., Mr. Schneider felt site disturbance is not excessive. Mr. Schneider distributed, to Council, pictures of some other sites that he took that were in the 90t-95% disturbance. Mr. Schneider stated Lot 77, Block 4 is 90s-100k disturbance and it is on a flat lot. Lot 1 on Wildwood Road is 95% disturbance. Mr. Schneider noted his project is 70t- 75t disturbance. Lot 5, Block 4 has a 23 1/2' cut on a steep slope site with no stepping what so ever, which is required by the steep slope guideline. Mr. Schneider noted his cut is less than 12' and his foundation is stepped. Mr. Schneider stated, even though his project doesn't pertain to the steep slope guidelines, in his opinion, he is still adhering to them as much as possible. Lot 105, Block 1 was just approved by Planning and Zoning and is approximately 80o disturbance. Mr. Schneider stated his point being, he is not asking for any favors. Mr. Schneider asked for the same considerations given to others who have built in Wildridge. Mr. Schneider stated he addressed Staff's comments regarding retaining walls, encroaching into the 10' slope maintenance, with Norm Wood on October 6th. Mr. Schneider stated he was told that as long as the walls were on the uphill side it would be allowed. Mr. Schneider stated there are many discrepancies if you drive around Wildridge on this issue. Regarding snow storage in the Town's easement, Mr. Schneider stated Staff said it was not acceptable. But, Mr. Schneider stated he spoke with Norm Wood on October 6th and Mr. Wood said it did not matter. Mr. Schneider stated the site has plenty of snow storage and added he was not asking to put snow storage in the Town's easement. Mr. Schneider commented that it was a staff concern that some snow might fall down into the easement. Mr. Schneider noted there are numerous houses and duplexes in Wildridge with snow storage problems but, some how it works and they are passed. Mr. Schneider felt he was unfairly, denied and that his project was judged partially on personal opinions and recommendations by the Staff. Mr. Schneider felt he has a right to develop his property with these proposed plans. 3 0 Mr. Schneider commented he has worked closely with a -licensed engineer to specifically comply with all of the Town of Avon's building,guidelines. Mr. Schneider mentioned there are no published Town of Avon engineering standards and added he could not be penalized for the grey areas that seem to exist within the Staff's recommendations and written guidelines. Mr. Schneider added it would be an undo hardship, at this point in time, to redesign this project to comply with personal opinions. Mr. Schneider stated he would appreciate Councils' comments or opinions. Mayor Fawcett asked for public input. Mr. Bill Shiffmacher stated he recently moved`up to Wildridge'and," lives near where Mr. Schneider is going to,build this"house. Mr. Shiffmacher stated if you drive through Wildridge, you.will find a very wide disparity in the design of houses-and.the way the lots are-done. There is everything from-the".Mayor's underground house to log houses, to Santa Fe houses, to modern houses:. Mr. Shiffmacher stated one of his concerns in moving to this- area was keeping houses that look good in the,'neighborliood. 'Mr. Shiffmacher mentioned Mr. Schneider was nice enough'to come around and show and tell the Shiffmachers what he was going to build. Mr. Shiffmacher stated from everything that he has seen, Mr.-Schneider's project enhances the neighborhood and helps property values., Mr. Shiffmacher was in favor of this house. Mr. Shiffmacher saw no reason to deny it on aesthetics, which Mr. Shiffmacher stated was one of the things that Mr. Schneider told him P & Z didn't like about it. Mr. Shiffmacher felt it was an asset to the neighborhood and asked Council to allow Mr. Schneider to build it. Mr. Shiffmacher.stated he lives just left of the white house that Mr. Schneider used to live in, in a duplex that was just finished at 5717 (Wildridge Road East). Director of Community Development Mike Matzko stated engineering guidelines weren't really used in this . . . this was the design guidelines. The steep slope guidelines say that any sites containing 20% . . . Matzko felt the engineer to be correct with his average of 18% . . . there are plenty of examples of slope.in there that are 2016 or more. In this case it met-the criteria for the steep slope guidelines. Mayor Fawcett asked for clarification; the appellants house did meet the steep slope guidelines of Avon? Matzko stated the lot required that staff apply the steep slope guidelines because it contained slopes of 20% or more. The engineer correctly pointed out the average slope is 18% but, to make an average you need something greater than and something less than. Staff came up with a number of areas in the building pad that were more than 20%. Mayor Fawcett asked for clarification or the meaning of the 23' cut, regarding the photo of Lot 5, Block 4. Matzko was reluctant to comment, without referring to that specific plan. Matzko noted, when we talk about site disturbance, there is the disturbance during construction, which gets re-vegetated and re- planted and the contours are more or less consistent with the original development. And, then there is the disturbance that requires alteration of the site permanently. Matzko questioned the comparisons of the other projects' disturbances. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. asked about the retaining walls. Matzko" responded, in Staff's opinion, the retaining walls shown on the plan violated the notion that the building was constructed to suit the site. In Staff's opinion, the site was modified to accommodate the building. Matzko added that they were not referring to that section of the lot which requires getting off of the street and onto the lot because Staff recognized the hardship in doing that. 4 i • Matzko continued that there is going to have to be substantial cut, removal of dirt, to get onto the site. That really wasn't the issue. It was once you're on the site, how was the site treated. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. asked about snow storage and that Mr. Wood said it was alright. Town Engineer Norm Wood recalled a very brief telephone conversation with Mr. Schneider regarding a generic question about buildings on the up hill side of a street and the impacts in Wildridge. Engineer Wood stated we have a 10' slope maintenance, drainage, and snow storage easement along each side of the street in virtually every case up there. That is particularly important in a lot of areas, generally on the down hill side in protecting the embankment where the road is built up to maintain the integrity of the roadway but, it also does provide some areas for snow storage. Typically, we are not all that concerned with the up hill side, which was the way the question was phrased. Mr. Schneider read the definition of a steep sloped sight; "A parcel of land or a building site which contains slopes in excess of 20%1. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. stated some is 18%, some 15%, and some is 25%. Mr. Schneider stated the site where the building is going, to go on, is roughly less than 201k. There is a steep portion in the back of the lot, which is an undisturbed area, as you can see on the site plan. The front portion is 50%- 60%, which, as staff has said, they have no problem with the driveway going in there. The driveway is flat, it's 5%, it's 4% in the first 201, 4%.for 20' in front of the garage, so it meets all their criteria. Mr. Schneider commented on the retaining wall. Mr. Schneider reduced the amount of retaining walls. All the retaining walls are landscape rock and are 1' to 41. Mr. Schneider added that in the steep slope guidelines it says that the use of retaining walls should be'used to reduce site disturbance and that is what he used them for. Councilor Benson asked if'tetaning'walls are legal'in setbacks., Matzko interpreted retaining walls for landscaping, unless they interfere with utilities or drainage and are kept,under 41, are not considered a structure and therefore-'do not apply to the setback regulations. Councilor Benson asked, if the retaining walls are 41, are there setback regulations. Matzko replied yes. Councilor Benson asked so all of those retaining walls must be below 4' to keep that within regulation. ,Matzko replied yes. Councilor Benson asked if that were possible with all those retaining walls. Councilor Benson noted there are a lot of retaining walls on this project. Matzko stated that question would need more time so that staff could look.at the grading plan, which a full sized copy was just received yesterday. Matzko added that would also be referred to the Town*Engineer. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. asked, that being the case, should Council table this until Staff reviews the grading? Matzko stated a reduced copy of the grading plan was distributed.to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Based on that, Staff made the recommendation that the plan appeared to use the site in a way that didn't,conform to the guidelines. At that point, the applicant wanted the process to move forward and get it before the Commission and staff agreed to do that. Matzko questioned whether the decision would have changed based-on the detailed plan. What it would answer is, is the wall over 4' or not. Mayor Fawcett asked Mr. Schneider what the purpose is of demonstrating the 23' cut. Mr. Schneider stated because, in the back of the residence he is proposing, the deepest cut is 12' in the northwest corner. And, the steep slope guidelines talk about stepping and it doesn't look like that was stepped at all. It is just a straight cut. Mr. Schneider added he was trying to show similarity- 5 Mr. Schneider commented there is plenty of site disturbance and twice the cut that he would be doing. Mayor Fawcett asked Mr. Schneider if he felt his site disturbance would be less because his cut would be less. Mr. Schneider felt it is very minimal compared to . . . Mr. Schneider noted he could go in there and put a huge duplex in-there and disturb a lot more of this site, like some of the other sites that are coming,to the Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr. Schneider felt he was keeping it to a minimum and that is why he is using walls, although all the walls are 4' or less. Do the retaining walls have to be under 41, Mr. Schneider guessed that would be a question for Engineer Wood. Mr. Schneider added all the walls that we've approved are all 4' or less, pretty much; that's the way we like to see the walls approved; 4' or less wherever they are. But, in Wildridge it is so steep you have a lot of walls that are of course a lot higher. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. noted that it states the amount of site disturbance may create an unnatural, altered appearance of the lot. Mr. Schneider believed that to be a matter of opinion. Mr. Schneider thought the way the house is to be nestled in there it would look fine and would be an addition to the neighborhood. When it is put back, it will look every bit as natural as anything, if not more. Mr. Schneider added most people don't go back in and re-vegetate with sage brush and things like that and Mr. Schneider agreed to do that. Councilor Benson asked if Mr. Schneider will need to haul a lot of dirt out of the site. Mr. Schneider thought not. Mr. Schneider thought he'd be able to use a lot of it, especially now that there is no walk-out in the back. There will be a door coming out the laundry room but, that is from the top floor, that is not from the lower level which is what Mr. Schneider called the walk-out. It walks out in the front. On the second floor there will be a walk-out if you leave the grade existing as it is now. Councilor Benson asked so on the bottom floor, you can't go out to the back. Mr. Schneider stated no, not the way it is now. Mr. Schneider stated he changed that so there would be less site disturbance to try to appease everyone. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. reminded that he spent many years on the Planning & Zoning Board and a lot of things on that Board are subject to interpretation of the people that are on the board. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. noted that Mr. Schneider mentioned two experienced Commissioners and added that the other Commissioners are as experienced. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. felt that the interpretation should be left to the P & Z to do what they do best. The P & Z worked hard on this haying,seen it-twice. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. would rather leave'it to the P & Z: Mr. Schneider stated he doesn't mind the P & Z putting him under a microscope, as he has been on the Board for almost a year and.a half and he pretty much knows what is passed and what isn't passed. Mr. Schneider stated everything he has done he has kept his word and has always built a great product and felt he has always made the right decisions. Councilor McIlveen asked if there was a simple fix to this problem. Matzko stated no. There was nothing short of modifying the massing of this building. Councilor McIlveen asked, because of the size? Matzko replied because of the size and it's orientation on the sight. The size worked against it. A much smaller design may well have worked. It appeared it was a combination of the way it was positioned on the sight and it's size. Councilor Reynolds, Sr. asked Mr. Schneider how far along is he. Mr. Schneider replied the plans are finished; all the architectural plans and the structural plans are finished. 6 • • Mr. Schneider noted he doesn't have a building permit to commence building. Mr. Schneider informed he did have a conversation with Matzko regarding a smaller house on that site. Mr. Schneider told Matzko, due to the economics of Wildridge and what the prices are up there, you can't pay $130,000, $150,000, $160,000 for a.lot and build a small house and have it be economically feasible from the builder's stand point or from a homeowner's stand point. Mr. Schneider stated if he is within the set backs and the guidelines . . . he is under the height . . . Mr. Schneider thought that should be taken into consideration. Mr. Schneider thought he should be able to build the type of house that he wants there. Mr. Schneider thought it was oriented well. Wildridge is-all about views. It is oriented towards the views. The building pad is almost flat. Mr. Schneider added he is 1' - 117" from each side yard set back. The driveway is near flat; it is 59k. It is southern exposure. Mr. Schneider thought it has a lot of things going for it and thought that should be taken into consideration. Councilor Carnes asked why couldn't Mr. Schneider build a smaller house more economically than a bigger house. Mr. Schneider stated he doesn't want to build a smaller house. Mr. Schneider stated for him it is not feasible because when you spend that kind-of money for a lot, he doesn't want to put a small house,on that lot. Mr. Schneider stated he needs to put a-larger house on that lot so that it is a better value and investment for him, as a homeowner. Mr. Schneider added he plans to make Wildridge his home for a long, long time. Councilor Carnes commented he didn't mean smaller as in half but this is a very big house. Mr. Schneider stated it is 4,560 square feet. Councilor Carnes thought perhaps a 4,000 square feet house and asked if.something like that would fit. Mr. Schneider stated he didn't know if that would appease the planners. Mr. Schneider added.comments have been made about the house, the dualing turrets; it has double turrets and a lot of people may not like the way it looks. But, being a member of the Planning & Zoning Commission, Mr. Schneider stated he tries not to put his personal view into the things he votes upon. Mr. Schneider exampled a house that just came through P & Z that was exposed concrete and corrugated metal; a $2,000,000 house that wasn't Mr. Schneider's taste but he felt they would do a good job, they had a good plan, they were within setbacks and they were within their rights to develop that lot and Mr. Schneider motioned to approve that. Councilor Carnes asked, so obviously Mr. Schneider is used to subjectivity playing a big part. Mr. Schneider responded yes,., Councilor Carnes asked' so every single problem that has been pointed-out by staff is subjective in Mr. Schneider's eyes. Mr. Schneider responded it, is a human trait, every one is and as humans we all make those decisions. Councilor Carnes asked so theoretically Mr. Schneider could build a little smaller house. Mr. Schneider stated theoretically he could. Mr. Schneider stated this house-is only 1,500 square feet from his last house. Mr. Schneider compared similarities of this house to his last house;. Mrs. Sally Ann Shiffmacher informed she and her husband have lived in the valley a long time and have gone,to a lot of design review boards building homes. Mrs. Shiffmacher 'stated she was shocked when she heard Mr. Schneider was having trouble with his house. Mrs. Shiffmacher thought it to be a beautiful home and it is in a neighborhood where other homes support building a home of this type. Mrs. Shiffmacher asked why Mr."Schneider should have to build something smaller if his dream house is something bigger. Mrs. Shiffmacher noted there are other houses bigger. Mrs. Shiffmacher stated the sight disturbance thing disturbs her because as you drive up Wildridge, you see numerous duplexes to just the boundary lines that disturb the landscaping. And,'Mrs. Shiffmacher stated we are not getting a duplex, we are getting a single family quality home. 7 0 0- Mrs. Shiffmacher thought everybody should be allowed to build their dream house and stated this is Mr.." Schneider's dream house. Mr. Andrew Karow, Chairman of P & Z, stated this is a.very. difficult site. Mr. Karow pointed out that is was not a unanimous decision to deny this application by P & Z. Five Commissioners were present. Three voted to deny, while two wanted to approve this. The Commissioners; that voted to deny, agreed on only one design criteria, which was the building working with the topography. Normally, in'the steep slope guidelines, you want the building to run parallel to the grade `and this one looks like it is about 30-45 degrees off of the grade. That was the real concern. Economics did not play a part of the P & Z's decision. Sight disturbance was an issue but,'not one that everyone could agree on. The three Commissioners, that voted to deny, agreed on the issue of topography. Mr. Karow,felt it did not meet design criteria number six, which it was dissimilar from other homes in the area. Discussions followed with too many people talking at one time. Mr.'Karow stated the planning commission evaluated this .application within the context of the Town's design review criteria and came to a decision based on those criteria. Mr. Michael Corral, a Wildridge resident, stated he has heard the word subjective used a lot and thought the wide variety of structures, that you see from the underground homes to the log homes, basically takes that subjectiveness out as a playing card. Obviously you can get different types of structures through, which eliminates the word subjectiveness. Councilor Carnes noted that he does not want to take somebody's right away to build their dream home. Councilor Carnes'-reason for-asking if Mr. Schneider could build a smaller home was to find a middle of the road; a solution. Mrs. Shiffmacher again voiced support of Mr. Schneider's home. Councilor Carnes mentioned letters received; some for and some against. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. motioned to deny the appeal of the Planning and Zoning decision for final design approval Lot 19, Block 4, Wildridge. Councilor Carnes seconded the motion. Mayor Fawcett called for a roll call vote. The motion carried with Councilor;..Benson.opposed: Citizen Input: Michael Corral asked if the roundabouts are going to be lined or striped. Town Engineer Wood responded the roundabouts are scheduled to be striped by Thursday. Total completion is estimated at two weeks. Other Business: Traffic sign on Metcalf Road Mayor Fawcett thanked Town Engineer Wood for the "hidden drive" sign on Metcalf. Mayor Fawcett expressed the sign works well. 8 i • Resolutions: Resolution No. 97-58, A RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT FOR VILLAMONTE AT WILDRIDGE TOWNHOMES, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 88, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO Mayor Fawcett announced this is a public hearing. Town Engineer Wood explained Monterra Ltd., the owner of Lot,88, Block 1 has"submitted a preliminary and final plat for Villamonte at Wildridge Townhomes. This is a developed site with four townhome units, with common area. The public hearing notices have been posted and mailed as required. Staff recommends approval of Resolution No. 97-58. Mayor Fawcett asked for any comments from the public. Mr. Rick Rosen, owner of Monterra Ltd. and applicant, commented on one of the problems he ran into. It is the question of the five lots versus the four lots. Mr. Rosen has four townhomes and a common area,.obviously providing the fifth lot and requiring preliminary plat approval. Mr. Rosen recommended that when you come in for your design review, since you are providing a site plan at that time, consider that the preliminary plan approval so you don't go through the questionable process of do I have four or five units. The final step then would be for final plat. Town Engineer Wood stated everything is in place to do that. In fact, Town Engineer Wood recommends frequently that the applicants file a preliminary plat with the design review. The applicant would come before Council on the preliminary.-at the same time they are going before P &-Z for design.-review. Then 'the final plat would become a formality.-': - Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Fawcett,asked for action from Council. Councilor Benson motioned to approve Resolution No. 97-58, Series of 1997. Councilor McIlveen seconded the motion and the-motion carried unanimously. Unfinished Business: Sunridge Shed Councilor Reynolds, Sr. asked if the shed is gone. Matzko replied that they have submitted a new application for the shed. If the application is not successful, they will move it. New Business: Approval of Streetscape Plan Mark Donaldson and George Pierce reviewed the Avon Road Roundabout Streetscape Master Plan. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. complimented Town Engineer Wood on the great job he has been doing with keeping the roundabout construction on schedule and under budget. Council's consensus was to proceed with developing contract documents for construction next year. Town-Manager Report: 9 Town Manager Bill Efting complimented staff on the great job they did for the Halloween Party in the park last'week. Consent Agenda: a.) Approval of the October 14, 1997 Council Meeting Minutes b.) Resolution No. 97-55, Series of 1997, A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT, THE ORCHARD TOWNHOMES, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 77, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO c.) Resolution No. 97-56, Series of 1997, A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT, ELK RUN TOWNHOMES, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 80, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO d.) Resolution No. 97-59, Series of 1997, A RESOLUTION'APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT, A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 56, BLOCK 1, WILDRIDGE, TOWN OF AVON, EAGLE COUNTY, COLORADO e.) Approval of the 1997/98 Amendment to the Beaver Creek Resort Transportation Service Agreement f.), Acceptance of 1998 Proposed Budget g'.) Financial Matters Councilor Benson motioned to approve the consent agenda. Councilor Reynolds, Jr. seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously. There being no further business to come before Council, Mayor Fawcett called for a motion to adjourn. Councilor Benson moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded by-Councilor Reynolds, Sr. The meeting was adjourned by Mayor Fawcett at 6:58 PM. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Patty Lambe CMC Town Clerk 10