PZC Minutes 10-06-2009 (2)HEART of the VALLEY
I �adFF'r.
l I
SITE VISTS (4:00pm — 5:00pm)
Town of Avon Planning & Zoning Commission
Meeting Minutes for October 6, 2009
Avon Town Council Chambers
Meetings are open to the public
Avon Municipal Building / One Lake Street
4121 & 4123 Little Point— Review of exterior building modifications and privacy screens.
4340 June Point — Mock-up review for materials and colors.
All commissioners with the exception of Commissioner Green were present at the Site Visits.
REGULAR WORK SESSION (5:00pm — 5:30pm)
Discussion of Regular Meeting agenda items. Open to the public
REGULAR MEETING (5:30pm)
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at approximately 5:30 pm.
II. Roll Call
All Commissioners were present.
III. Additions and Amendments to the Agenda
Item IX. Moved to consent agenda and tabled until the next meeting.
IV. Conflicts of Interest
There were no conflicts of interest to disclose.
V. Consent Agenda
• Approval of the September 15, 2009 Meeting Minutes
• Item IX. Minor Project, Long Spur Addition & Renovation (Tabled)
Action: Commissioner Struve moved to approve the minutes and the tabled Item IX.
Commissioner Green seconded the motion and it passed 6-0, with Commissioner Roubos
abstaining due to her absence at the previous meeting.
DESIGN REVIEW — MINOR PROJECT
VII. Courtyard Villas
Property Location: Lot 12 & 13, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision / Buck Creek Road
Applicant: Michael Hazard, Morter Architects /Owner. Advanced Home Technologies
Description: Minor Project review for several modifications to an existing design approval. The
modifications include fireplace design change, removal of the chimneys, removal of windows
on various elevations, and addition of privacy screens.
Discussion: Commissioner Goulding highlighted that the site visit was a follow up to the
previous hearing that was tabled.
Commissioner Anderson agreed with the window modifications and chimneys removal. He
also commented that the privacy screens would not have a negative effect on neighboring
properties.
Commissioner Lane agreed with the previous comments, but did comment that the privacy
screens are still hard to understand. He wasn't in favor of the upper level privacy screens due
to their architectural compatibility.
Commissioner Prince also agreed with some of the previous comments, but did state his lack
of agreement with the privacy screens. The upper level, south unit screen doesn't fit within the
design guidelines. The lower level, south unit screen should have increased landscaping,
specifically evergreen trees to help mitigate the appearance. The northern unit privacy screen
doesn't affect the design and he has no issues with that one.
Commissioner Roubos wanted the privacy screens to appear like an extension of each wall it
is attached to. She did agree with the landscaping comments on the ground mounted screen
previously stated.
Commissioner Struve wanted the applicant to gain approval of any future modification prior to
the change being made. He does support the proposed modifications, but did comment that
two additional evergreens would help the ground mounted privacy screen. Commissioner
Struve also commented that he preferred the original light fixtures for the driveway when
compared to the proposed fixtures.
Commissioner Green questioned the light fixtures as well. He didn't believe there would be a
negative affect to any adjacent property. He did state his support for the proposed chimney
and window modifications.
Commissioner Goulding questioned the fire places and their need for venting. Ignacio De
Iraola explained the new fireplaces. He didn't feel that the privacy screens would have
negative affect so long as the materials were the same as adjacent materials.
Commissioner Prince asked for a specification sheet for the proposed light fixtures.
Commissioner Green explained that additional landscaping would need to be provided around
the ground mounted privacy screen.
Commissioner Anderson questioned whether a tree or shrub would be required.
Commissioner Green responded that a 4 foot to 6 foot tall tree would be sufficient.
Commissioner Anderson stated that a smaller planting would help keep view corridors.
Action: Commissioner Green moved to approve the minor project application with the following
conditions:
1. The materials of the privacy screens shall match adjacent building surfaces and materials;
2. Add coniferous plant material that at maturity does not grow to be larger than the privacy
screen and that the landscaping be placed adjacent to the privacy screen; and
3. Approve the driveway light per site visit.
Commissioner Struve seconded the motion and it passed 5-2.
VIII. Horton Residence
Property Location: Lot 59, Block 3, Wildridge / 4340 June Point
Applicant: Millie Aldrich, Pure Design Studio / Owner. Norma Horton
Description: A follow up meeting to the on-site mock-up review, performed earlier in the day, of
the proposed materials and colors.
Discussion: Staff "briefly outlined the previous approvals and the on-site mockup review
performed earlier in the day.
Commissioner Green questioned the stone on the mockup and its compatibility with the
original submittal. He had additional concerns over the proposed colors. He was also
concerned with the amount of white proposed and that depicted on the mock-up. He wanted
to see more compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood. He also had concerns with the
reflectivity of the metal roof.
Commissioner Struve would prefer if the light was on a timer so it didn't shine all night. He
r was in favor of the materials, but he preferred the original colors versus the proposed colors.
Commissioner Roubos had concerns over the contrast. She felt the colors were too white.
Commissioner Prince agreed with Commissioner Struve's comments about the address light
on a timer. He didn't have an issue with the materials, but didn't understand how the color
palette would flow together. He did comment on the blue color during the early morning of the
exposed steel.
Commissioner Lane questioned one of the conditions of approval. Staff read the specific
condition into the record. Commissioner Lane did state that the proposed colors lacked
contrast and didn't blend well with the surrounding environment. He was in favor of the roof
color.
Commissioner Anderson questioned the compatibility with the surrounding environment when
it wasn't snowy. The proposed colors are too white and lack a variety of earth tones.
Commissioner Goulding compared the mock-up to the background, specifically highlighting the
sagebrush colors. He felt the proposed colors lacked blending with the environment and stood
out too much. He was in favor of the concept, but felt the execution of colors lacked
sufficiency.
Commissioner Roubos questioned the Design Guidelines and their applicability to metal roofs.
Staff read into the record the roof related sections of the Design Guidelines.
Commissioner Green questioned the metal roof reflectivity and the Light Reflective Value.
Staff responded by highlighting the application materials that outlined the LRV value of the
proposed roofing material and color.
Millie Aldrich responded that the material on the mockup was representative of the color not
the reflectivity. This is due to the cost associated with powder coating the metal.
Commissioner Lane asked if the applicants thought the proposed colors reflected the
surrounding environment.
Commissioner Goulding asked Staff if the materials and colors were up for review and asked
for clarification. Staff outlined the approvals and mailing that were provided to the applicant
that specifically stated all conditions of approval.
Commissioner Goulding outlined the issues discussed at this meeting and asked the
Commission for clarification on all issues to provide feedback to the applicant. Commissioner
dialog ensued regarding the specific color issues.
Millie Aldrich commented on how the varying plans of the building will help provide shading
and shadow effect that will soften the similarity of the proposed colors.
Commissioner Roubos once again commented on how white the proposed color palette is and
how much it has varied from any of the previous color boards.
Commissioner Lane stated how much contrast exists on the site and how little contrast the
mockup showed.
Commissioner Roubos stated that the mockup did not represent earth tone colors.
Commissioner Prince asked if the elevations could be provided. Staff brought forth reduced
plan sets that illustrated the elevations.
Action: Struve moved to approve the materials and colors as represented on the mock-up with
the condition that the mock-up not be removed until TCO. Commissioner Green seconded the
motion and it passed 4-3.
IX. Minor Project
Long Spur Addition & Renovation
Property Location: Lot 34, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision / 2195 Long Spur
Applicant/ Owner. Debra Rappaport
Description: Andrew James Abraham of AJA Studio is proposing changes to Final Design
approval for an addition and complete renovation to a single family residence at the end of
Long Spur Road. This application proposes several changes to the building, including but not
limited to: roof forms, window size and placement, door locations and materials, landscaping,
materials, and interior changes.
Discussion: The agenda item was discussed during the work session.
Action: Moved to consent agenda and tabled.
X. Other Business
• Short Term Rental Overlay Zone District Update
• Gandorf Tract B PUD next week at Town Council
XI. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at approximately 7:50
Approved
W. Todd G
Chairperso
Phil Struve
Secretary