Loading...
PZC Minutes 060397Record of Proceedings Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes June 3, 1997 Regular Meeting The Regular Meeting of the Town of Avon Planning and Zoning Commission was called to order by Chairperson Andrew Karow at 5:43 p.m., June 3, 1997, in the Council Chambers, Avon Municipal Building, 400 Benchmark Road, Avon, CO 81620. Members Present Mike Dantas Chris Evans Anne Fehlner Andrew Karow Sue Railton Beth Stanley Agenda Call to Order Roll Call Commissioner Schneider absent. Staff Present Linda Donnellon, Recording Secretary Karen Griffith, Town Planner George Harrison, Planner Steve Hodges, Community Service Officer Mike Matzko, Community Development Director Additions and Amendments to the Agenda Karen Griffith requested that Lot 39, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision be added as Item C of the Consent Agenda. Conflicts of Interest Commissioner Fehlner declared a Conflict of Interest regarding Item C of the Consent Agenda. Consent agenda A. Approval of the May 6, 1997 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes B. Approval of the May 20, 1997 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes C. Lot 39, Block 3, Wildridge Subdivision - Eschenlohr Residence Project Type: Approval of Roof Materials Property Owner: John Eschenlohr Consultant: Greg Lemon, Architect and Vail Associates Group Address: 4550 Flat Point j Ap&z\minutes\1997\060397.doc Motion Commissioner Dantas moved to approve Items A, B, and C of the Consent Agenda. Commissioner Stanley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously with Commissioner Fehlner abstaining. Final Design Review A. Lot 36, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision - Southwest Builders Duplex Project Type: Residential Duplex Property Owner: John Salko Applicant: Thomas Campbell, Southwest Builders, LLC Consultant: R.T.L. & Associates Address: 5016 Wildridge East George Harrison made a brief presentation as outlined in the staff report. Discussion followed regarding the site modification for the dual driveway and reduction of the retaining wall. Staff was recommending approval of the project with five conditions. The site was unique in two ways; the slope was perpendicular to the road and included dual driveways. Commissioner Stanley commented on the slopes and garages. Mr. Harrison said the applicant was within the 4% slope guidelines. Mr. Harrison presented a site plan to the Commission for review. Clay Campbell, Southwest Builders, LLC., made a brief presentation to the Commission and apologized for the poor copies of the 11 x 17's. He commented on the following; driveway was at 9.75 feet "of cut" from the house and 8.65 "of fill" in the driveway with some site disturbance in the area. Commissioner Fehlner said she was concerned about the site topography and said she did not take exception to the dual driveways. Commissioner Evans asked the applicant what was changed regarding the retaining walls and the amount of retainage to the site. Mr. Campbell said two bedroom windows were eliminated on the east side, which eliminated the retaining walls and decreased the pitch of the slope. Commissioner Evans said he agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Fehlner regarding Item G of the staff report. He said he did not have a problem with the dual driveways but did not favor them personally. He further stated that he was concerned with Design Review Consideration number 4, site topography, of the Design Review Guidelines. Mr. Campbell said before the modification, site disturbance was 100% of the property, with the proposed modifications and new changes, only 2/3rd of the site would be disturbed. He further discussed the construction of the foundation in relationship to the slope disturbance on the site. Commissioner Evans reiterated Item G of the staff report in response to the comments made by Mr. Campbell. Mr. Campbell reiterated the construction of the foundation and site disturbance onto the slope. 2 Commissioner Stanley commented on the disturbance underneath the house. Mr. Campbell said around the house. Commissioner Stanley suggested that the site disturbance be kept at 50%. Mike Matzko said that the site disturbance should be kept at a minimum of 50%. Mr. Harrison said that 50% usually dealt with site coverage of the building and building footprints. Actual disturbance for many projects were close to 90% (+) to the site, which would need to be re -vegetated and/or re -landscaped. Commissioner Stanley asked if this was in writing. Mr. Harrison said "no". Commissioner Stanley asked about the grade of the driveway to the garage doors. Mr. Campbell responded to the elevation as; the west side was "83.14" and the east side was "83.7". Discussion followed between the Commission members regarding the grade of the driveway in front of the garage doors. Mr. Harrison mentioned the grade was 8%. Commissioner Stanley asked if this was allowed for a parking space. Mr. Harrison said " yes" and addressed the regulations in regards to what was occurring from the edge of pavement to the property line. Commissioner Stanley expressed that this may not be the best solution or design for this lot. She further mentioned Design Review Consideration number 4, site topography, of the Design Review Guidelines. Commissioner Stanley mentioned the dual driveways were a safety issue. Mr. Campbell asked the Commission to review the 11 x 17's presented to them in their packets. He said visibility was increased 100 yards, either way, for both driveways because Tracts 0, 4 and C will never be built on. Commissioner Dantas said he did not have a problem with the dual driveways. He commented on the design of the driveways in relation to the site. Commissioner Railton said she did not have any comments at this time. Chairperson Karow discussed the retaining walls on the east side of the property. Mr. Campbell said there would be one (1) solid rock retaining wall. The center wall would be (6) six feet high, the wall closest to the house will be (3) three feet high sloping down to the road. The retaining wall encroaches onto the easement by 10 feet. Mr. Harrison said staff has made a recommended condition, number 5, of the staff report regarding this. The closest point of the retaining wall to the east property line was just a little over 10 feet. The distance between the dual driveway was 85 feet from center. Mr. Harrison noted the eave overhangs in relationship to the Design Review Guidelines. He said the building would need to be moved north (6) inches, so that the eaves would not encroach into the setbacks. 3 Motion Commissioner Railton moved to approve the Final Design Review for the residential duplex for Lot 36, Block 4, Wildridge Subdivision as depicted on the plans dated "Received" May 20, 1997, with the following conditions: 1. All flues, flashing and galvanized metal will be painted to match surrounding materials. 2. All meters will be placed upon the building. 3. Automatic irrigation system will be installed. 4. During construction the first 20 feet of the drive will have at least 2 inches of 3/4" rock. 5. Specify height of all retaining walls to insure no retaining wall greater than 4 feet will be placed in any setback. 6. The building to meet the building setbacks and the eaves to meet the 18 inch overhang requirements. Commissioner Dantas seconded the motion. The motion passed 4 (four) votes to 2 (two) votes with Commissioners Stanley and Evans opposing. B. Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision - Pazzo's Pizzeria Project Type: Patio Fence and decorative lighting Property Owner: Michael Phillips, Phillips & Assoc., Inc. Applicant: Brian Hutchinson, Pazzo's Pizzeria Address: 0082 East Beaver Creek Blvd. Karen Griffith made a brief presentation as outlined in the staff report. The purpose of the fence was to provide some screening from the west and north parking lot. Staff recommended that a (4) four foot picket fence be allowed to be installed on top of the existing wall, this would exclude any post that would be over the (4) four foot height. Commissioner Evans asked for clarification regarding the (4) four foot high picket fence on top of the existing (2) foot retaining wall. Ms. Griffith said the retaining wall varied in height. Commissioner Stanley commented on the proposed lights strung along the fence post. Ms. Griffith said the lights would be located (8) eight feet on top of the support beams above the floor of the patio. Ms. Griffith said the lights would be like Christmas bulbs. Mark Collins represented the applicant who could not make the meeting. He said the proposed fence was to block out the road and help block the wind. He agreed with staffs recommendation regarding the landscaping. Commissioner Fehlner said she did not have any comments and that the application appeared to met the Design Review Guidelines. Commissioner Evans agreed that the fence would be a good addition to the property. Commissioner Stanley questioned the proposed lights. Commissioner Dantas explained the dimensions of the post height and retaining wall height for the fence to Commissioner Stanley. Discussion followed. 0 Commissioner Railton said the lights would add "atmosphere" for the business. Commissioner Stanley said she had a problem with the lights on the fence. Commissioner Dantas said he was in favor of the proposed fence and lights. Commissioner Railton said she was in favor of this application. She suggested that all the posts supporting the lights be the same height. Mr. Collins said they will. Commission Stanley asked if the lights would be shut off after business hours. Mr. Collins said "yes". However, he said he was not sure where the source of electricity would come from at this time. Commissioner Railton commented on the location of the outlets for the lights. Mr. Collins said there were outdoor outlets outside of the building. She suggested that the wires be neatly placed as not to hang from the fence. Chairperson Karow commented on the height of the wall. Ms. Griffith said the height ranged from (2) feet up to (3) feet. Chairperson Karow commented on the size of the picket portion of the fence being (4) feet tall and the fence post remaining (6) feet tall. Ms. Griffith said the plans were describing the pickets as (5) feet tall and an additional (1) foot of post. She suggested lowering the pickets to (4) feet. The bulk of the fence would be (4) feet in height. Chairperson Karow asked staff if the top of the pickets could be even with the posts. Ms. Griffith said "yes". Further discussion followed regarding the height and the slope of the retaining wall. Commissioner Railton discussed the west elevation of the retaining wall with the north and south sides sloping downward. Chairperson Karow wanted to make sure that the top of the fence posts were level due to the slope of the retaining wall. Commissioner Dantas said he did not think this mattered with the retaining wall sloping downward. Motion Commissioner Stanley moved to approve the Final Design for the proposed fencing and string lights for Tract Q, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision as depicted on the application and plan set dated May 2, 1997 with the following conditions: 1. Landscaping be provided on the north and west sides of the fence to be approved by staff. 2. The fence pickets to be a maximum of 4 feet tall on the west elevation from the top of the lowest point of the retaining wall and the posts can be 1 (one) foot higher than the picket fence. Commissioner Railton seconded the motion. The motion passed with unanimously. 5 C. Lot 28, Block 2, Wildridge Subdivision - Plavec Duplex Project Type: Duplex Residence Property Owner/Applicant: George Plavec Consultant: Pat Hubble, Summit Studio Address: 2619 Beartrap Road George Harrison made a brief presentation as outlined in the staff report. He said the proposed duplex was similar in design and siding to the neighboring lots. Staff said this project was in conformance with the Design Review Guidelines and recommended approval for this duplex. Commissioner Evans asked staff what type of glass was in the light fixture. Mr. Harrison responded that the glass was clear and stated his concerns regarding the glare that would illuminated to the adjacent property owners. Mr. Harrison said he was not sure if the proposed glass light fixtures would be located over the rear decks or not. However, he said he did not see a problem with the proposed lights being located in front of the house, due to a lower elevation. Mr. Harrison said upon reviewing the site plans, the light fixtures appeared to be located on the south side elevation, rear deck. Commissioner Dantas said this type of fixture did not provide a lot of light. George Plavec, applicant, made a brief presentation to the Commission. He said that there were (2) two different types of light fixtures for the project; one was a down can fixture with clear glass and the other was a white frosted globe fixture. Commissioner Fehlner was concerned about Item 6 of the Design Review Guidelines, "no improvement be so similar". She said the building meets all the Design Review Guidelines. Commissioner Evans said he agreed with staff recommendations regarding the landscaping for the west and south sides of the building. He suggested that a 14 foot wide asphalt driveway be installed and (5) five gallon shrubs or lower lying shrubbery be added to help break up the west side of the project. Mr. Plavec responded that he was trying to stay consistent with the amount of landscaping for each project. Commissioner Stanley said the project appeared to conform with the Design Review Guidelines and agreed with staff recommendations. Commissioner Dantas said the project conformed with the Design Review Guidelines and agreed with the changes made to the garage area. He agreed with the comments made in regards to the landscaping. Commissioner Railton said she agreed with everything except for the landscaping. She suggested landscaping be added to the north, east and west elevations. She recommended that the applicant present a revised landscaping plan to the Commission for approval. Chairperson Karow commented on the landscaping and suggested that all (4) four sides of the project be landscaped. Commissioner Railton suggested planting native bushes and/or trees. Co Chairperson Karow asked the applicant if he was comfortable with staff recommendations. Mr. Plavec said "yes". Mr. Harrison commented on the landscaping, stating that the rear elevation was a very critical portion of the structure to be covered. Commissioner Dantas expressed his opinions regarding the placement of the trees during windy conditions. He suggested planting sage brush instead. Motion Commissioner Evans moved to approve the Final Design Review for the residential duplex for Lot 28, Block 1, Wildridge Subdivision as depicted on the plans dated "Received" May 28, 1997, with the following conditions: 1. All flues, flashing and galvanized metal will be painted to match surrounding materials. 2. All meters will be placed upon the building. 3. Automatic irrigation system will be installed. 4. During construction the first 20 feet of the drive will have at least 2 inches of 3/4" rock. 5. Landscape plan needs to keep all proposed materials within the property boundaries, provide a complete site solution. Landscape plan to be submitted for staff review. 6. All coniferous trees be a minimum of 6 feet tall, all deciduous trees a minimum of 2 inches in caliper and all shrubbery be a minimum of 5 gallon container size. 7. The asphalt driveway be a minimum of 14 feet wide. Commissioner Fehlner seconded the motion. The motion passed with unanimously. D. Lot 1, Avon Town Square - Insty- Prints of Avon Project Type: Window Signs Property Owner: Alfred Williams, ATS Joint Ventures Applicant: Doug Bergmann, Insty Prints of Avon Address: 0030 Benchmark Road, Unit 103 George Harrison made a brief presentation as outlined in the staff report. Staff said that the proposed windows signs were not in conformance with the Master Sign Program for the building. Mr. Harrison said the Condominium Association approved the window signs and presented a letter to staff, date received May 14, 1997. Doug Bergmann, applicant, made a brief presentation to the Commission. He explained the following issues regarding his application; individual identity with other print shops, exposure and advertising. He said he was not aware of the Town's requirements regarding the number of signs per windows. He asked the Commission to approve his application and also asked that they review other signs around the area. He explained that the size of the signs were smaller than what the Commission perceived. Commissioner Fehlner said the applicant has meet all the Design Review Considerations and agreed with the uniformity of the signs around the window with out the cluttered look. Commissioner Evans said he agreed with some of the comments made by Commissioner Fehlner and said that the signs did appear smaller than what he had envisioned based upon the 7 application. He said he agreed with staffs comments regarding the repetitious nature of signs in general but they were not repetitious in his opinion. Commissioner Stanley appreciated the staffs efforts in abiding by and being consistent with the Design Review Guidelines. She said she agreed with the limitation of numbers of signs within the town.. She said the signs should not be repetitious. She further stated that the sign should not be repetitious, but the uniqueness and creativeness of the design was attractive. Commissioner Dantas said the signs were a benefit to the business and that the application meet all the Design Review Criteria. Commissioner Railton said all signs deserved consideration and agreed with the comments made earlier. Chairperson Karow said the sign was excellent but commented on the window treatment and advertising of the sign. He said the signs meet all the Design Review Considerations. Commissioner Evans stated for the record the Sign Code and the verbiage for "repetitious nature". He said he felt this application was not repetitious because of the paraphrase in Section 15.28.080, Sign Allowance, Part E, Window Signs. He read, "further provided that wording there on were not repetitious of other signs in the immediate vicinity". He further stated that this sign did not violate that criteria. Mr. Harrison mentioned 2 (two) issues regarding the Master Sign Program; they were; 1). The building had a existing Master Sign Program and 2). Amendment could be done to the Master Sign Program for Insty Prints. Staff said they would be more than happy to work with the applicant regarding these issues and present the amendment of the Master Sign Program to the Commission as a Consent Agenda item. Chairperson Karow asked staff if this application conformed to the Master Sign Program. Mr. Harrison said the existing Master Sign Program did not address either signs. That was why staff used the Sign Codes for their staff report. Chairperson Karow asked the applicant if he wanted to change the Master Sign Program to reflect the window signs. Mr. Bergmann said he could not answer this question at this time, that he would have to meet with the Condominium Association. Commissioner Railton was concerned about other businesses using window signs in second or third story buildings. Mr. Harrison said this would have to be addressed as part of the amendment for the Master Sign Program. Commissioner Railton said this application was unique and a good design. Commissioner Stanley said she agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Railton. Further discussion followed regarding the issues not addressed in the Design Review Guidelines regarding window signs. Commissioner Fehlner said window signage was not addressed in this buildings Master Sign Program. Mr. Matzko responded that the sign program was suppose to integrate the signage on a building and stated that there was no context in the application. The Master Sign Program assured the continuity and integration of the sign and application. Commissioner Fehlner stated that it was the Condominium Associations responsibility to bring the sign application to the Commission not the applicant. Mr. Matzko said this was not the focus for approval regarding the applicant of the Condominium Association. He suggested revising the Master Sign Program. Commission Fehlner asked staff for guidance in this procedure. Commissioner Stanley said the applicant was part of the Condominium Association. Mr. Matzko said he agreed. Commission Railton suggested that a general guideline be developed for the whole town. Mr. Matzko requested that the Commission do not include any suggestions or recommendations in the motion, either direct or do not direct, it would make it very difficult for staff. Chairperson Karow asked staff if the application should conform with the Master Sign Program. Mr. Matzko said "yes". Chairperson Karow asked staff if they had a copy of the Master Sign Program for the building. Mr. Matzko said "yes". Further discussion followed regarding the verbiage for the motion between staff and the Commission. Commissioner Evans and Commissioner Stanley both said they disagreed with this approach. Mr. Matzko apologized to the Commission, stating that staff should have researched and presented this application more thoroughly. Motion Commissioner Stanley moved to approve the Final Design Review for the proposed window signage for Lot 1, Avon Town Square, Unit 103 as presented with the application dated "Received" May 14, 1997, as submitted. Commissioner Dantas seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. E. Lot 45, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision - Minor Project Project Type: Materials Modification - Replace Exterior Siding and Trim and Color Change Property Owner: Points of Colorado Applicant: Holly Parker Address: 0340 Benchmark Road Karen Griffith made a brief presentation as outlined in the staff report. She discussed the four issues listed from the staff comments. She said metal siding, according to the Design Review Guidelines, was only allowed with specific approval from the Commission. Beaver Creek West and the Christie Lodge were (2) two buildings in the town that had steel siding. 9 Staff did not have a formal recommendation for this application. Larry Doll, developer for Falcon Point, presented samples of the steel siding, color rendering board and photographs to the Commission. He described the following; color change, product maintenance, 20 year guarantee, compatibility, and appearance. Stewart Olson, Architect, made a brief presentation and said he agreed with the comments made by staff. He described the various selections; the color concept in attempt to make a change to approve the buildings appearance, to give the building personality, upgrade the finish materials, reduce maintenance and contrast between the steel siding and stucco materials. Commissioner Railton asked about the pool building and the painting of the main building. Holly Parker, applicant, used the steel siding sample to explain the concept of the colors and shapes for the building. Photographs were used to show the pool building. Commissioner Dantas said he liked the proposed colors and that the it satisfied the Design Review Criterias. Commissioner Stanley said she like the idea of "blending" of the materials. She asked about the horizontal and vertical siding for the pool house. She asked staff if the balconies would have open balusters. She said the project conformed to the Design Review Guidelines. Commissioner Evans said he agreed with the upgrades and colors. He asked about the roof. Mr. Olson said the roof would stay as is, the rendering applied to the snow loads. The color sample was for reference only. Commissioner Fehlner asked about the (2) two color sample boards regarding the specific colors, products and manufactures names and numbers. She stated she wanted to make sure the colors presented at the meeting would be the same colors used on the building. Chairperson Karow said the project conformed to the Design Review Guidelines and asked about the different colors and the decision reached to use these colors. Commissioner Railton asked about the comparison and manufactured products proposed for this application and the product used on the Christie Lodge. Ms. Parker said the product used on Christie Lodge was a quarter panel lap steel siding. Motion Commissioner Fehlner moved to approve the color selection as indicated on the color board presented for Lot 45, Block 2, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision, which includes both the physical changes to the steel siding and that the railings will be open balusters. Commissioner Railton seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 10 Public Hearing A. Lot 36, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision - Rich's Auto Body Project Type: Special Review Use for Auto Body Shop Property Owner/Applicant: Rich Cooper Consultant: Mark Donaldson, Victor Mark Donaldson, Architects Address: 0120 Metcalf Road Karen Griffith made a brief presentation as outlined in the staff report. The proposed expansion would result in around 7,300 square feet and a final CO (Certificate of Occupancy) will be required from the previous expansion completed in 1994 prior to occupying the new space. Commissioner Fehlner commented that the snow storage area was shown on the site plan. Ms. Griffith said this was an over sight from staff. However, she noted that some of the snow storage area was off the property and in the right of way. Commissioner Evans discussed the comparison of the previous work done and the proposed remodel. Ms. Griffith said the previous work was completed during 1994. Mark Donaldson, Architect, made a brief presentation and mentioned the following conditions from staffs recommendation; conditions number 2 - snow storage area, number 3 - solid wood fence and commented on number 10 - it was the owners intention that the condominium plat will remain in two separate condominium spaces. Chairperson Karow opened Public Hearing, seeing no one, he closed Public Hearing and opened for Commission review. Commissioner Railton asked about the car parking in the expanded area and asked how it was calculated. Ms. Griffith said the (2) two parking spaces were used per 1000 feet of area. Commissioner Railton stated she was concerned about the number of cars in the parking lot. Mr. Donaldson responded that the south parking lot would be used for employee parking and designated unloading of supplies. Commissioner Railton stated she was concerned about the mess behind the building and suggested that the area be cleaned up or disguised from the road. Mr. Donaldson said a solid screen would help. Mr. Donaldson said TCI Cablevision has a lot miscellaneous items located on top of the berm from Lot 36. Rich's Auto Body had his operation fenced in his property. Commissioner Railton asked about the landscaping. Mr. Donaldson said additional landscaping would be added to the site and thinning of the trees would take place in order to expose the business sign. Commissioner Dantas asked about staffs condition number 10 and commented on the party wall agreement. He also asked about the comments made regrading thinning of the trees. Mr. Donaldson reiterated that the thinning of the trees would help expose the business sign from the street. 11 Commissioner Stanley asked about the additional bay space. Mr. Donaldson said this would be an additional shop space for the business. Commissioner Stanley asked about condition number 10. Mr. Griffith said this condition was stated as a "catch all if there were any required changes needed to be made" that this statement would come into effect. Commissioner Stanley asked about the following; the fence used as a shield for the dumpster and snow storage area. Mr. Donaldson said the snow storage area was designated on the site plan and would work with staff in meeting this condition. Commissioner Stanley said the project met all the Design Review Guidelines. Commissioner Evans said the project met all the Design Review Guidelines. He stated that this project had less visual impacts than other businesses in the area. He asked about the letter for U Store It. He mentioned that when a citizen voices their concerns, the Commission would need to address and discuss their concerns. Commissioner Fehlner said she concurred with the comments made by Commissioner Evans and was concerned about the letter from U Store It. Chairperson Karow said he agreed with the comments made by Commissioner Evans and commented on the following issues; a fence to be used as a screen, condition number 4 being as one of the most important conditions on staffs recommendations, designating a parking area for loading, employees and cars repaired on site and landscaping. Chairperson Karow suggested the condition number 7 be revised to add short term customer parking. Mr. Donaldson said the applicant was unaware of the need for a CO (Certificate of Occupancy) for the existing use and that he was now in the process of meeting this requirement. Motion Commissioner Evans moved to approve the Special Review Use for Lot 36, Block 1, Benchmark at Beaver Creek Subdivision as described on the site plans dated 5-29-97 with the following conditions: 1. Snow storage areas be approved by staff. 2. No snow accumulation shall occur outside designated snow storage areas. Any excess snow shall be hauled off-site. 3. A wood veneer fence be constructed to screen the trash enclosure and rear storage area for vehicles. 4. A loading area be designated on the site. No loading shall occur in Metcalf Road. 5. The delivery of vehicles by tow trucks shall occur on-site. 6. Vehicles shall be parked in designated parking or storage areas only. 7. One of the parking lots shall be reserved for short term customer parking with a minimum of 3 (three) spaces marked with designated signage. 8. All landscaping shown on the plan shall be provided and any dead or dying plants be replaced. All new plant material shall be a minimum of 2 inch caliper for trees and 5 gallon containers for shrubs. All new or replacement plants shall be planted prior to occupancy of the expanded business in the southern condominium space. 9. All landscape areas shall be weeded. 12 10. Any required changes to the party wall agreement or condominium plat be made and approved by the Town through the subdivision review process. 11. All requirements from previous approval be satisfied prior to occupancy of the southern condominium space. 12. Documentation be provided that Rich Cooper is owner of the southern condominium unit. Commissioner Stanley seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. Other Business A. Staff Updates 1. Folkvord Duplex Landscape Plan and Building Materials George Harrison made a brief presentation and presented material samples to the Commission. He said he original colors for the siding was beige and brown, and that additional landscaping would be added. Discussion followed regarding the type of material to be used for the proposed siding. Mr. Harrison said there was limited information regarding the proposed material at this time, that the applicant would need to supply this to the staff and Commission. Staff recommends that the applicant submit a formal material application to the Commission. No formal action was taken. 2. Update on Buck Creek Condo and Sunridge Storage Sheds Karen Griffith made a brief presentation to the Commission. She said the maintenance workers installed (2) two Tuff Sheds one at each location without staff or the Commission approval. Staff was working with the applicants regarding the application to find a suitable location for the sheds. Problems noted were; one shed was located in the setback and the other in the middle of a parking lot. The sheds would be used for storage. The proposed sheds would be located in an landscaped area and screened with trees and shrubbery. Staff recommended that the roofing material and siding on the shed match the existing buildings. A review and decision would be scheduled with the Commission. Discussion followed regarding past reviews on sheds in the Wildridge area. No formal action was taken. 13 B. Regulations and Code Update Discussion The Commission reviewed the Procedures, Rules and Regulations and discussed pages 1 through 16 presented by Mike Matzko. No breakfast meeting was scheduled for next Tuesday between staff and the Commission. The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposed changes to the Avon Municipal Codes presented by Steve Hodges. No formal action was taken. C. Continuation of Other Business Recognition for Jack Hunn and the service he had performed for the Town of Avon. Sue Railton presented a memorandum to the Commission and staff, dated June 2, 1997 from Railton - McEvoy Architects regarding the concerns about design requirements that pitched roofs have a minimum one and one half foot overhangs. Adjourn Commissioner Evans made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Commissioner Fehlner seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously and the meeting adjourned at 10:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Linda Donnellon Recording Secretary M. Dant C. Evan, A. F MKI S. Railton M Schneider B. Stanley 14