Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning and Zoning Commission - MINUTES - 03/26/2025Planning & Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING March 26, 2025 – 6:00 PM Council Chambers, City Hall 300 Laporte Ave Also via Zoom CALL TO ORDER: 6:00 PM ROLL CALL a. Board Members Present – Julie Stackhouse (Chair), David Katz, Shirley Peel, Ted Shepard, York, Russell Connelly b. Board Members Absent – Adam Sass (Vice Chair) c.Staff Members Present – Frickey, Kidwell, Boster, Mounce, Kleer, Gilchrist d. Guest(s) – Laurel Branstrator, Julie Thompson, Luke Friese, Ryan Braunschweig, Briana Wilkson Chair Stackhouse provided background on the Commission’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. She described the role of the Commission and noted that members are volunteers appointed by City Council. The Commission members review the analysis by staff, the applicants’ presentations, and input from the public and make a determination regarding whether each proposal meets the Land Use Code. She noted that this is a legal hearing, and that she will moderate for civility and fairness. AGENDA REVIEW Clay Frickey, Planning Manager, stated staff is proposing moving the Heritage Christian Academy ODP to the beginning of the Discussion Agenda as a community member would like a presentation. Additionally, Frickey noted the appeal was withdrawn by the appellant late this afternoon for the Montava Phase D Core item. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION None. CONSENT AGENDA 1.CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 5, 2025 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the February 5, 2025, special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission. 2.HERITAGE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY - ODP This is a request for an Overall Development Plan (ODP) to establish general planning parameters for a private school campus located on approximately 20 acres in the Employment (E) Zone District located northeast of the intersection of International Boulevard and Mexico Way. Future phases of the school campus envision new classroom, administrative, and recreation / sports field facilities. The ODP is subject to a Type 2 review and public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Future phases of the campus will also require individual reviews and public hearings. (**Secretary’s Note: This item was moved to the Discussion Agenda) 3.2025 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION WORK PLAN The purpose of this item is to review the 2024 Planning & Zoning Commission projects and the 2025 Work Plan. 4.MONTAVA PHASE D CORE This is a Resolution of the Planning and Zoning Commission extending the Hearing Deadline for an Appeal to the Basic Development Review approval for Montava Phase D Core and Irrigation Pond, a 50- acre site approved for approximately 330 dwelling units, generally located east of N Timberline Rd., and north of Mountain Vista Dr. (**Secretary’s Note: This item was withdrawn from the agenda.) Commissioner York made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Connelly, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended to include only the minutes of the February 5, 2025, meeting and the 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission Work Plan items. Yeas: York, Shepard, Peel, Katz, Connelly, and Stackhouse. Nays: None. THE MOTION CARRIED. DISCUSSION AGENDA 2.HERITAGE CHRISTIAN ACADEMY - ODP This is a request for an Overall Development Plan (ODP) to establish general planning parameters for a private school campus located on approximately 20 acres in the Employment (E) Zone District located northeast of the intersection of International Boulev campus envision new classroom, administrative, and recreation / sports field facilities. The ODP is subject to a Type 2 review and public hearing with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Future phases of the STAFF: Ryan Mounce, City Planner Staff Presentation Ryan Mounce, City Planner, stated this item is an Overall Development Plan (ODP) for approximately 20 acres in the Employment Zone District within the Mulberry Corridor. He stated the ODP proposes a phased development of a private school campus and noted the property already contains a school facility that houses approximately 240 students and may ultimately house approximately 600 students upon buildout of the ODP. Additionally, Mounce noted that the ODP has some flexibility for some other primary or secondary uses in the zone district and there are some existing light industrial businesses already operating contiguous with the school. Mounce noted that an ODP is required when a site is going to develop in multiple phases over time and it establishes some high-level general planning parameters and access and transportation plans for the site. It does not grant any vesting for actual construction which would require future project development plan (PDP) reviews by the Commission for individual phases. Mounce discussed the project location and context and showed photos of the existing site and area of the ODP. Applicant Presentation Angie Milewski, BHA Design, noted the annexation of this property was recently approved by City Council and she provided some history of Heritage Christian Academy and discussed its planned expansion, which will likely happen in phases, and thus the ODP. She noted every future PDP will also go through a development review process and outlined the criteria for approval of an ODP. Criteria include compliance with City Plan, the Structure Plan, and the policies of the East Mulberry Corridor Plan. She stated the applicant team has demonstrated compliance and consistency with the permitted uses and the zone district standards, and the ODP and future development plans will remain consistent with the required densities established in the Land Use Code. Additionally, Milewski stated the plan conforms with the Master Street Plan, the required traffic study data has been provided, and an ecological characterization study and overall drainage report have been provided. She noted that staff has provided a recommendation of approval of the ODP. Staff Follow-up Mounce provided additional staff analysis and noted there are three parcels identified as part of the ODP: parcel C, which is the location of the existing school building, and parcels A and B, which are primarily undeveloped. He noted there are seven specific Land Use Code criteria for the review of an ODP and provided an overview of the staff analysis for each of the criteria. He reviewed the key themes heard as part of the neighborhood meeting for the ODP, including concern about the timing and function of school drop-off and pick-up with additional students, increased traffic impacts, and traffic access. Commission Questions Commissioner Katz asked if there is a minimum gross land area size for an ODP. Mounce replied there is no minimum size; the primary threshold is that the project will be developing in phases over time. Commissioner Peel asked about the process for ensuring there is enough parking for future potential uses such as a soccer field. Mounce replied there are specific parking and other compatibility standards in the Land Use Code for those types of uses and staff would examine those when that particular phase comes forward. Public Participation Laurel Branstrator stated she is primarily concerned about traffic impacts and asked if a traffic study has been completed that would include the expansion of the school. She stated traffic in the area is already congested and there is only one entrance and exit for the school and subdivisions in the area. Julie Thompson expressed concern about the location of the sports fields given noise and light impacts. Additionally, she expressed concern about traffic impacts, particularly at the International and Timberline intersection. Staff Response Mounce noted there was a traffic study completed with the Overall Development Plan, and when each phase comes forward, it will be evaluated against that traffic study which will be updated as necessary. He noted the traffic study found the level of service standards are being met currently; however, it also found there are long delays at the International and Timberline intersection, which is common with unsignalized intersections on arterials. He also noted long-term plans do call for the signalization of the intersection and additional roadway connections. Mounce stated the City’s notification requirements were met for this project, including a published notice in the Coloradoan, signs being posted on the property, and written notices to residents within 800 feet of the site boundary. Mounce stated the location of the sports field has yet to be determined; however, lighting and noise considerations would all be part of the staff review for that individual phase and associated standards would need to be met. Applicant Response Milewski noted the graphic shown indicating the location of the sports field was an early concept fundraising graphic which was shown at the neighborhood meeting. However, she noted the site has yet to be fully programmed and designed. She stated all future project development plans will meet applicable requirements for lighting, compatibility, and parking. Commission Questions/Discussion Commissioner Peel noted the Commission had asked if there are any buffers for future development around the school, including alcohol and marijuana sales and oil and gas development. Mounce replied those buffers would apply and extend as the school property boundary extends, though they are already essentially in effect as the school is operating on a portion of the site. Chair Stackhouse requested staff discuss warrants and funding for signalization. Steve Gilchrist, Traffic Engineer, replied there are nine warrants which examine traffic volumes, accident data, and other factors to determine whether a signal is necessary based on federal guidelines. He stated the arterial-arterial intersection at International and Timberline has inconsistent traffic and currently does not meet daily warrants for a signal; however, there will be some type of control at the intersection in the future, likely based on future development of properties to the east and west. Chair Stackhouse asked about the signage and notification that will be made available to the public for the forthcoming project development plans. Mounce replied that each project development plan will follow the same notification requirements of the Overall Development Plan, including a posted sign on the property, mailed notices to properties within 800 feet of the site regarding neighborhood meetings or hearings, and a notice published in the Coloradoan. Additionally, there is an option through the City’s webpage to sign up for the development review newsletter. Commissioner Shepard asked if the notification area could be enlarged for future project development plans. Mounce replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard asked if there has been any consideration of vanpooling or bussing in the future. Mounce replied that it has not been addressed but noted this school draws from the entire community and perhaps regionally; therefore, most of the students will be driving or dropped off. Commissioner Shepard thanked the speakers and acknowledged the concerns about traffic at peak times for the school; however, he noted residents will likely become use to those schedules. Commissioner York made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission approve the request for an Overall Development Plan to establish general planning parameters for a private school campus located on approximately 20 acres in the Employment (E) zone district, finding that the development plan would not be detrimental to the public good, the development plan complies with all applicable development standards as contained in Articles III and V, and zone district standards as contained in Articles II and IV at the time of the application. This decision is based upon the agenda materials and information and materials presented during the work session and this hearing, and the Commission discussion of this item. Further, this Commission hereby adopts the information, analysis, findings of fact, and conclusions regarding the modification of standard contained in the staff report included in the agenda materials for this hearing. Commissioner Connelly seconded the motion. Yeas: Peel, Katz, Shepard, Connelly, York, and Stackhouse. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. Chair Stackhouse thanked the speakers and noted there is much more to come with respect to the phases of the development proposal. She also concurred with the idea to extend the notification radius and provided a reminder about the development review newsletter. 5. UPLIFT SELF STORAGE AT RUDOLPH FARM DESCRIPTION: This is a request to develop a self-storage facility at Lot 11 part of the Rudolph Farm PUD. (parcel # 8715300012). The Applicant is proposing to develop a two-phase self-storage/mini-warehouse project on a 3.07-acre lot as part of the proposed Rudolph Farm PUD and Plat, specifically Lot 11, located along the frontage of Clydesdale Parkway just north of the FRICO ditch and adjacent to the western boundary of the Prospect Middle/High School property. The proposal is for the construction of a 3-story, 100,800- sf +/- building in the first phase, which will be a mix of drive-up units and interior, climate- include approximately 7,900-sf of single-story, drive- Access is taken from the future Clydesdale Pkwy. to the west. The site is approximately 0.23 miles east of Interstate-25 and approximately 0.16 miles north of E Prospect Rd. The property is within the Industrial District (I), and is subject to a Type 2 Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission is the STAFF: Kai Kleer, Sr Planner Staff Presentation Kai Kleer, Senior Planner, stated this item relates to a self-storage project located off Prospect Road near the Timnath Middle/High School. He noted the project was submitted in 2023 and is therefore being evaluated under the Code that was in place prior to the 2024 Land Use Code update. He noted the property is part of the Rudolph Farm Overall Development Plan, which includes a large swath of Industrial property to the north and northwest of this site and a General Commercial zoned area to the south of this site. Kleer discussed the natural habitat buffer zones that impact this site and noted this project proposes some slight modification of those buffer zones. Additionally, the project is proposing two development phases, the second of which would be developed in the future should market conditions warrant, but is part of this request. Kleer noted all of the utility and roadway infrastructure is being established currently under an approved development construction permit. He went on to outline items for consideration by the Commission and discussed applicable design standards in the I-25 Corridor Plan. Kleer noted some public comments from 2023 have been added to the staff report since the work session which indicated general opposition to the land use and support for more residential supporting businesses. Applicant Presentation Aaron Thompson, Aperio Property Consultants, stated phase one of this development would be a 3-story climate controlled self-storage building. He stated self-storage is one of the lowest impact uses for Industrial zoned properties in terms of traffic, noise, and light generation. He noted the building will not be open 24 hours a day and no outdoor storage is being considered. Thompson stated the proposed phase one building is approximately the same height as the nearby school and there is about ¼ mile of distance between the two buildings. He also noted there is a natural habitat buffer between the site and the nearby trail. Chris Aaronson, VFLA Architecture, stated work has been done to modify some of the Uplift corporate standards to better meet local codes for the zone district, particularly as related to building articulation and materiality as well as additional glazing along the street facing façade. He showed renderings of the building and discussed the proposed building materials. Tony Ollila, Uplift Development, stated Uplift Development is based out of Norther Colorado and owns and operates over 20 self-storage facilities and other properties in several states. He showed some photos of previously developed self-storage facilities and noted each facility has its own full-time staff to run the business and lease the units. He reiterated that the facility will not operate 24 hours a day. In terms of traffic impacts, Ollila stated the facility will likely only generate about ten vehicles per day and will serve a community need. He also stated the building will be well designed and not an eyesore. Staff Analysis Kleer commented on the applicable landscaping screening standards and the site design and layout standards. He noted the site plan calls for a landscaping and berming approach around the perimeter of the site, with berming only on the southern portion of the site, which will be the most highly visible portion of the property. Additionally, the project will provide street trees and plantings in the natural habitat buffer zone. Kleer discussed the applicable commercial design standards and staff’s analysis of both phases of the proposal. He stated the ODP does not contain design standards that contribute to unifying the project area as it develops over multiple phases. However, he stated the specificity provided in the I-25 Subarea Plan standards provides enough Code standards to define the character of buildings within the Industrial district and General Commercial district. Kleer stated staff finds overall compliance with the applicable Land Use Code standards and is recommending approval of the project. Commission Questions Commissioner Shepard asked about the fencing requirement. Kleer replied, self-storage facilities are typically fenced, though this proposal does not include fencing. He stated the Commission could condition a certain type of fence if desired. Commissioner York asked if the second phase of the project would also be limited timing access, and if so, how that would be controlled without a fence. Ollila replied the second phase would be exterior drive- up and the hours would remain the same; a fence or gate on the entry to those would likely be contemplated at the time of development of that phase. Commissioner Shepard asked about the necessity of the overhead metal door on the elevation that faces Carraige Parkway. Aaronson replied it is an accent panel, not an operational door. He stated that material could be changed to stucco or a window if desired to eliminate confusion, though there are some canopy features along the façade that the Commission may want to preserve. Commissioner Shepard asked about the spacing of the street trees and whether they are uniform or have gaps. Aaronson replied there are areas where trees are not proposed to maintain sight distance for the Carraige Parkway curve. Commissioner Shepard requested assurance the project will not have yellow doors. Kleer replied yellow doors have not been shown to this point, and they would be prohibited under the standards. Commissioner Shepard asked if the metal doors are low reflectance. Aaronson replied the plan is for the doors to be painted a light tan color to reduce reflectivity. Chair Stackhouse asked what types of uses are allowed in the Industrial zone district. Kleer replied, the zone district allows for a number of uses including self-storage, light industrial, which includes some level of manufacturing, heavy industrial, some extraction uses, and a number of commercial uses. It does not permit residential uses or schools. Public Participation Luke Friese opposed the proposed use and stated he cannot imagine there is demand for an additional three-story storage facility noting there are nine such facilities along Mulberry Road between I-25 and Lemay, three along Harmony, and 118 within a 15-mile radius of Timnath. He stated the community would much prefer some type of commercial development that would better serve residents. Briana Wilkson opposed the use of the property for self-storage, particularly given the height of the building. She noted the Timnath Middle/High School is a two-story building. She stated there are many other options for the property that would be more beneficial to the community. Em Myler, Neighborhood Development Liaison, read a comment from Ariel Friese opposing the proposed project and stating there are many other uses for the site that would better serve the community and students at the nearby school, including a park. Ryan Braunschweig opposed the proposed project and stated many other uses would be more valuable to the community and school students. Staff Response Kleer reiterated the Industrial zone district is fairly-permissive and any of the allowed uses could be developed. He noted the Parks and Recreation Master Plan does identify a park for this area and one of the sites being contemplated for that is a portion of the Urban Estate zoned area within the same ODP. Additionally, Kleer noted the area just to the south of this site is zoned General Commercial and is overlayed by an Activity Center, which is envisioned to have an urban level of development with neighborhood serving uses. Kleer stated the Industrial zone district allows up to four stories and noted this project is proposed to be 37 feet in height and three stories, and the school averages about 32 feet in height and two stories, though its highest point is 42 feet. Applicant Response Ollila stated demand for self-storage is considered within a certain trade area radius and based on their data, there is sufficient demand for a facility in this area. He also noted there are many other lots in the ODP that may provide an opportunity for development of other uses. Commission Questions/Discussion Chair Stackhouse asked if the proposed building height is consistent with what is allowed in the zone district for that lot. Kleer replied in the affirmative. Commissioner Shepard asked about the landscaping that will be going in with phase one that may be more attuned to phase two. Kleer replied buffer yard standards were used to guide the landscaping requirements. Additionally, there will be perimeter landscaping installed with phase one that will benefit the east and north sides of the property line and work is being done with the applicant team to emphasize the use of evergreen material and year-round screening. Commissioner Shepard commented on the typical fencing for self-storage facilities that are close to residential areas, which seems to be a five-foot wrought iron equivalent, and recommended it for this project. Kleer stated he is not recommending a condition of approval related to the fencing and noted a minor amendment would be required if the applicant wanted to install a fence in the future, which would need to meet I-25 Subarea Plan standards. However, if desired by the Commission, that level of detail could be added to the plan now which would negate the need for a minor amendment in the future. He read the I-25 Subarea Plan standards related to fencing. Commissioner Shepard noted the I-25 standards were written prior to this type of use being present in the Fort Collins market and may not be as specific as the Commission would prefer. Chair Stackhouse asked the applicant to clarify the intent around future fencing. Ollila replied fencing was not proposed because fences are associated with self-storage facilities, and without a fence, the building looks more like an office building. However, a fence or gate would be needed for phase two. Chair Stackhouse suggested not considering the fence issue given it is not proposed at this point. Commissioner Shepard reiterated that the standards that are in the Code were written prior to this type of use and noted there are good examples of self-storage fencing to consider. Commissioner Shepard expressed support for the PDP and the building design; however, he concurred with some of the public comments that seeing a field developed into a three-story structure will be abrupt. He expressed concern about the ODP not having a unified, cohesive design and suggested staff have some conversations with the property owner about how to unify the 13-lot ODP per character and image Code standards. Commissioner Katz acknowledged resident concerns but noted the role of the Commission is to implement the Land Use Code. He commended the design work. Commissioner Connelly echoed Commissioner Katz’ comments and thanked those who spoke. He noted it is not the role of the Commission to determine the highest and best use of a property. Commissioner York reiterated the Commission’s role to implement the Land Use Code and noted the use is allowed. He stated the area will continue to change and develop. Chair Stackhouse stated the proposal meets the Land Use Code standards. She complimented the applicant on the design and echoed Commissioner Shepard’s comments about unifying the development moving forward. Commissioner Katz made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Commission approve the Uplift Self-Storage PDP on Lot 11 of the Rudolph Farm ODP finding that the project would not be detrimental to the public good, the development plan complies with all applicable development standards as contained in the Land Use Code. This decision is based upon the agenda materials and information and materials presented during the work session and this hearing, and the Commission discussion of this item. Further, this Commission hereby adopts the information, analysis, findings of fact, and conclusions regarding the project contained in the staff report included in the agenda materials for this hearing. Commissioner Shepard seconded the motion. Yeas: Peel, Katz, Shepard, Connelly, York, and Stackhouse. Nays: none. THE MOTION CARRIED. OTHER BUSINESS Commissioner Shepard thanked Commissioner Katz for his service on the Commission. ADJOURNMENT o Chair Stackhouse moved to adjourn the P&Z Commission hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30PM. Minutes respectfully submitted by Krista Kidwell Minutes approved by the Chair and a vote of the Board/Commission on 05/15/25.