Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 08/21/19970 • Council Liaison: Mike Byrne I Staff Liaison: Bob Blanchard Chairperson: Gwen Bell Phone: (H) 221-3415 - Vice -Chair: Glen Colton Phone: (H) 225-2760 (W) 679-3201 The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairperson Bell. Roll Call: Gavaldon, Davidson, Weitkunat, Craig, Chapman, Bell. Member Colton was absent. Staff Present: Blanchard, Eckman, Harter, Ludwig, Jones and Kreimeyer Agenda Review: Director of Current Planning Blanchard reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agenda's: 1. Minutes of the July 22, September 23 and October 7, 1996 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings. (Continued). 2. #54-87AN Miramont Self Storage PUD - Final 3. Modifications of Conditions of Final Approval. Discussion: 4. #65-82C 1733 Somerville Drive Preschool - Preliminary and Final Project Development Plan. 5. #72-84A Willow Crossing PUD - Preliminary (Amoco and McDonald's) Member Weitkunat moved for approval of Consent items 2 and 3. Member Gavaldon seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0. Project: 1733 Somerville Drive Preschool Preliminary and Final Project Development Plan Case #: #65-82C Project Description: Request for Seedlings Preschool and Day Camp (for up to twelve (12) children) to be located at the residence of the • applicant at 1733 Somerville Drive. The site is zoned RL, Low Density Residential. This project was appealed to City Council and a verbatim transcript is attached. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MEETING BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Held Thursday, August 21, 1997 At Fort Collins City Council Chambers 300 West Laporte Avenue Fort Collins, Colorado Concerning Seedlings Preschool and Daycamp Members present: Gwen Bell, Chairman Alex Chapman Sally Craig Bob Davidson Jerry Gavaldon Karen Weitkunat For the City: Paul Eckman, City Attorney's Office Bob Blanchard, City Planning Office Leanne Harter, City Planning Office 1 2 1 MS. SELL: We will move on to Item Number 4, 2 then, for discussion. The Somerville Drive Preschool. Could 3 we have a staff presentation, please. 4 MS. HARTER: This is a request for a project 5 development plan for the proposed Seedlings Preschool and 6 Daycamp, for up to 12 children. It is located at the 7 residence of the applicant which is 1733 Somerville Drive. 8 The site is zoned RL, low density residential, and it is a 9 permitted use as a type two review. I do have vicinity maps 10 and I'll go to the second one which is little bit closer. 11 That's a little bit better, at least. The site is located in 12 the Fairbrooke Subdivision, which is south of Prospect Road • 13 and east of Overland Trail and as I said it is at 1733 14 Somerville Drive. This project development plan complies 15 with the applicable requirements of the land use code, 16 specifically, Sections 3.8.4 which deal with child care 17 center regulations of Article 3 and the applicable district 18 standards and Article 4 which are in Section 4.3 low density 19 residential district. 20 As I stated earlier, a child care center is a 21 permitted use as a type two view in the land use code. 22 Division 4.3 of the land use code identifies.locational 23 requirements for child care centers in the RL zoning - 24 district. The codes states that provided that no child care • 25 center shall be permitted to locate -- to be located in the 3 1 zone district on property which is within 1,500 feet of any 2 existing child care center within the city. 3 The Seedlings Preschool and Daycamp meets the 4 requirements of this standard. Furthermore, those standards 5 which are applicable to child care centers located in 6 Article 3, the general development standards, Division 3.8, 7 supplementary regulations, places requirements on child care 8 centers. The proposal meets those applicable requirements 9 as follows. 10 A minimum of 2500 square feet of outdoor play 11 area is required. The outdoor play area proposed for the 12 12 children is 3,937 square feet. Furthermore, any play area 13 must be fenced in by a solid decorative wood fence at least 14 six feet high, in this proposal, a solid six-foot decorative 15 wood fence of cedar material will enclose and screen the 16 proposed play area. Somerville Drive is considered to be a 17 local street and for those projects not located on local 18 streets, off-street vehicular bay or driveway must be 19 provided for loading and unloading. That standard is not 20 applicable since Somerville is a local street. 21 The last requirement is that indoor space at 40 22 square feet per child must be provided. And for Seedlings 23 Preschool and Daycamp, they are providing 62.08 square feet 24 per child, exceeding the minimum required. A neighborhood 25 meeting was held on June 25th and a few issues were raised. • 4 1 Got to get to that slide. Those issues were an increase in 2 traffic along Somerville Drive, as well as parking 3 associated with the child care center. The possibility of 4 noise resulting from playing children outside impacts your 5 property values and the decrease in the overall quality of 6 life associated with living close to a child care center. 7 Staff recommends approval of Seedlings Preschool and Daycamp 8 Number 6582 AC, and the applicant has prepared a brief 9 presentation and when she is finished, both of us are 10 available to answer auestions. 11 MS. BELL: Thank you. Is there any Board 12 questions of the staff at this point? Let's go ahead and • 13 have the applicant's presentation, then. Please come down 14 to the podium. Either one is fine. And sign in and you do 15 have 30 minutes for your presentation. 16 MS. SMITH: My name is Heather Smith and I am 17 asking the Planning and Zoning Board to approve the project 18 development plan for the child care center commonly known as 19 Seedlings Preschool and Daycamp. The hours of operation 20 would be 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. There is not a specific 21 drop off time to stop a large amount of traffic coming at 22 one time. The number of children will not exceed 12 and 23 they are between the ages of two and five. To have this 24 number of children, one additional employee would be needed • 25 besides myself. Therefore, parking required for this 5 1 facility is three car spaces. The employee will park in our 2 garage and the two -car driveway will be reserved for the 3 pick up and drop off of children. When enrollment is up to 4 six full-time children, a 15-passenger van will be purchased 5 for the purpose of transporting children into the 6 neighborhood if they do not live here already. And also for 7 field trips. Seven children already plan on attending that 8 live within walking distance of the facility. And we plan 9 on limiting noise by limiting playtime outside and by 10 transporting children to play in other areas. I have a list 11 of 25 playground areas in Fort Collins that we can use. As 12 we plan on limiting traffic by the purchase of the van and 13 also by not having a specific drop off and pick up time. 14 And many of the parents will be walking their children over 15 since seven of them live really close to the facility. - 16 Seedlings Preschool is really mission work for my 17 husband and I, and we would like to use it as an outreach 18 tool to provide a Christian education to, similar to a 19 Sunday School, to a broader audience that may not attend 20 church on Sundays. And our goal is to help the children in 21 this community develop a strong foundation to carry them 22 through their young adult lives. And I have two letters of 23 support from people that live directly next to us that could 24 not come tonight. 25 • 6 1 Dear Council Members: I am writing with regards 2 to the proposition to open Seedlings Preschool at 1733 3 Somerville Drive. I am both a neighbor of the Smiths and a 4 parent of two preschool age children enrolled at Seedlings. 5 I have no opposition, whatsoever, with a preschool in our 6 neighborhood. I think the idea of a small, neighborhood 7 preschool will be a tremendous asset both to our 8 neighborhood and to the community at large. Not only will 9 this be a splendid learning experience for our children, we 10 will have the opportunity to make connections with other 11 parents of preschoolers in our neighborhood. I feel this 12 will bring us all a little closer together. • 13 The several times I have talked with Heather and 14 Tony, I have found them to be friendly, enthusiastic and 15 very willing to negotiate and problem solve over any 16 potential conflict. I do not see any problem with increased 17 traffic or noise to our neighborhood because of the 18 preschool. If a problem should arise in the future, I have 19 every confidence that Seedlings Preschool and the Smiths 20 will work with the neighbors to come to an agreeable 21 solution. My vote is a big yes for Seedlings Preschool. 22 Sincerely, Cindy Ramirez at 2613 Somerville. Court. 23 I have one other letter. Dear Leanne: I 24 understand that the residents at 1733 Somerville Drive are • 25 interested in starting a day care in their home. We live at 7 1 1739, neighbors right next door. We are unable to attend 2 the development proposal meeting because we are away on 3 vacation. The purpose of this letter is to express to you 4 how we feel about the matter, things we have already talked 5 about with our neighbors. We are in favor of a day care at 6 1733 Somerville Drive. I believe the owners to be 7 responsible and very open to the needs and concerns of our 8 neighborhood and will work and cooperate with us if problems 9 were to arise. We are comfortable with the hours of the day 10 care, as well as how they intend to deal with noise and 11 traffic concerns. 12 We also believe the center could actually have a 13 positive influence since many of the children will be from 14 around the neighborhood and because of the nature and 15 curriculum design of the center. If you have any further 16 questions, or desire to discuss with us anything about the 17 development proposal, please feel free to call. Sincerely, 18 Ed and Kathy Niswender. 19 Thank you for considering this proposal. 20 MS. BELL: Is there anybody else who will be 21 speaking right now? Okay. All right. It is now time to 22 open up discussion to the public. Is there anyone present 23 tonight who would like to come to the podium and address us 24 on the matter of this day care? Please come down and sign 25 the sign -in sheet and state your name for the record, • I please. 2 MS. SCHROEDER: My name.is Deanne Schroeder and 3 my husband Troy and I live at 1727 Somerville Drive, that's 4 right next to the -proposed preschool. And we did go to the 5 neighborhood meeting and express our concerns there. I'm 6 not sure if you had an opportunity to review any of the 7 material that I sent in, but Leanne did summarize some of 8 the things that I did touch on. First -- actually, can I 9 ask how much time do I have? 10 MS. BELL: Good question. Four minutes. 11 MS. SCHROEDER: Thank you. First of all I'd like 12 to express some concerns that I know Leanne touched on. But 13 first of all, we are concerned about the traffic issue that 14 we believe is going to take place when there are 12 kids and 15 one employee -coming on, and we do live right next door so 16 that does concern us. In addition to that, one of our main 17 concerns, too, is the property value. I can't completely 18 describe or even predict what impact this will have on the 19 exact value of the property, however, I did put together a 20 survey and it was sampled randomly to 50 people. And I do 21 have some survey results that I would like to share with 22 you. And out of the 50 people that responded, the 23 respondents, 88 percent responded they would not purchase a 24 new home next door to an in -home day care or preschool, and 25 that concerns me because, and I don't know exactly what the W 1 financial impact will be, but I believe that the number of 2 potential buyers for my home would be significantly 3 decreased if I do have a preschool located right next door 4 to me. So that really concerns us. And along with the 5 traffic, we believe that not only there's going to be a lot 6 of traffic, there's going to be a lot of noise. 7 I am a part-time student at Colorado State 8 University and I do study at home frequently during the day. 9 So that concerns me that I won't have that opportunity to do 10 that anymore with 12 kids right next door to me. In 11 addition to that, I do work at Symbios Logic here in town 12 and we do go to work around 7:30 and come home around 5:30, 13 so that would be at the exact same time as the drop off and 14 pick up times for most of those students. Had I known that 15 there would be a proposed preschool right next door to me, 16 certainly I don't believe that, why I absolutely know that I 17 wouldn't have purchased the home. I guess the primary 18 concerns would be the .traffic, the noise, and the property 19 values potentially decreasing with this. 20 MS. BELL: Thank you. Is there anybody else who 21 would like to come forward and talk? 22 MR. ZUBER: Hi. My name is Matthew Zuber. I 23 live at 1721 Somerville. And our concerns are a lot as our 24 neighbors, and part.of it for us was we were really pleased 25 to be buying a new house and had, prior, lived about 12 10 1 years, five backed up to Edora and seven right across from 2 Overland Trail Parks. And it was great while we wanted to 3 do that, and we expected that the noise that was typical of, 4 you know, the parks, and we specifically chose what we 5 thought would be a quiet area. I understand that six kids 6 is not a problem, and that's really not too bad for us, we 7 have three of our own. We just kind of felt that 12 kids, 8 you know, during the day and whatnot, would tend to take 9 away from what we had hoped, you know, the quiet afternoons 10 and things of that nature, and that's really about all I 11 have. Thanks. 12 MS. BELL: _Thank you. Is there anyone else who • 13 would like to address the Board? 14 MS. SCHWAB: My name is Fernanda Schwab 15 (phonetic) and I live at 1715 Somerville, and I have the 16 same concerns that previous people talked about already: 17 Traffic, noise level. I just think that between 7:30 and 18 5:30 there will be cars coming back, and, you know, picking 19 up kids, dropping them for the day care. Also, I just 20 bought that home maybe about four months ago, my husband and 21 I, and we didn't know about the preschool that was going to 22 be there. If we would have known, we probably would not 23 have purchased that home, at least not at that location 24 which is three doors south of their home. So like I said, • 25 we do have concerns, and they're basically the same that 11 1 previous people have talked about. Thank you. 2 MS. BELL: Thank you. 3 MS. BUCHANAN: Hi. My name is Laura Buchanan. 4 I'm a broker associate with Wheeler Realty and also the 5 sales agent for C and M Homes. I sold a lot of these folks 6 their homes and I'm here to kind of talk about what I 7 believe, in my professional opinion, would be affecting 8 their resale value. As we know, there's a lot of properties 9 on the market right now, and things are a bit sluggish. I 10 know that Fairbrooke has some of its own problems that it's 11 dealing with, also. If all things were equal, most of my 12 clients that I work with, if they had a choice of buying a 13 brand new home next to a day care center or not buying a 14 home because it was next to a day care center, would opt not 15 to buy a home next to.a day care center. Of course none of 16 us could predict that people were going to start a day care 17 center, so there wasn't anything that we could disclose at 18 the time these homes were bought, but I think that people do 19 rely on their realtors to kind of help them with what's 20 going to happen in the future with resale, and I do think 21 that this would impact resale. Thank you. 22 MS. BELL: Thank you. Is there anybody else who 23 would like to address the Board on this topic? 24 MR. DAVENPORT: My name is Jon Davenport.' 25 Actually, I don't live in this neighborhood, but I do know • 12 1 the Smiths. And I live at 530 Larkbunting Drive which is 2 quite a different part of town. However, my wife and I have 3 lived there for about ten years. What we didn't know when 4 me moved there was that there was a preschool down the 5 street. And I don't know if it would have impacted our 6 decision to buy, but I can tell you now, that perhaps in 7 about a year I would predict from my experience that most 8 people who are concerned about it will realize it's really 9 not a problem. I haven't seen any more traffic than I would 10 have thought normal for a neighborhood that size that I live 11 in on that street. 12 So I guess what I'd like to tell you is that I • 13 think these are fears that are genuine, but would be allayed 14 after experiencing this facility. Especially knowing this 15 couple who's wanting to do this, what hardworking, 16 conscientious people they are. So I just want to express my 17 support for not only them, and their plans, and their 18 integrity, but for the concept of having neighborhood 19 preschools in Fort Collins. I think it's great. 20 We moved here because this is a progressive city 21 and whenever you do something that's progressive, there are 22 lots of people who are afraid of that. However, I would 23 just encourage the Council to stand behind the decisions 24 that were made prior to allow preschools, because I think • 25 it.'s really needed, especially given how we're so busy today 13 1 and we need preschools in our neighborhoods to take care of 2 our children. Thank you. 3 MS. BELL: Thank you. Is there anybody else who 4 would like to come forward and address the Board on this 5 matter? Okay. Not seeing that there is anyone else, I will 6 bring the matter back before the Board, and is there anyone 7 who would like to begin with any questions? 8 MS. WEITKUNAT: I had a quick question for 9 Ms. Smith. Did I not hear you say that there was no 10 specific drop off time? That this was a daycare, the hours 11 were 7:30 to 5:30, but would you clarify that, please. 12 MS. SMITH: By those times I just mean that no 13 children will be accepted before those hours, just so there 14 wouldn't be any inconvenience as far as early arrivers and 15 things. But there -is no specific drop off time. Everybody 16 that has expressed interest to me has all different times, 17 drop off, and all different situations. 18 MS. WEITKUNAT: So actually, should there be a 19 drop off time, it could be anywhere between 7:30 and 20 whatever? 21 MS. SMITH: Yeah. 22 MS. WEITKUNAT: And you wouldn't anticipate that 23 at full -- 24 MS. SMITH: No. Absolutely. 25 MS. WEITKUNAT: That 12 cars would pull up at 14 1 7:30 and leave their kids. 2 MS. SMITH: Absolutely not. And all of them are 3 not leaving at 5:30. Some leave at 3:30, just depends on 4 everybody's situation, but so far nobody has matched. 5 MS. WEITKUNAT: And the other point of 6 clarification is at the start of this project, you'do not 7 envision that you will start with a full house of 12? 8 MS. SMITH: Absolutely not. 9 MS. WEITKUNAT: It will take some time to build 10 to, but 12 is max. 11 MS. SMITH: Exactly. So far I am not up to six 12 full-timers yet.. • 13 MS. WEITKUNAT: And your intent, then, when it is 14 fully complete, at that time you will purchase a van to 15 transport. 16 MS. SMITH: Yes, we were thinking maybe over six 17 to eight children we would purchase the van to help with 18 noise in the area, and taking children to play elsewhere, 19 and also on field trips to the library and other reading 20 times around town. And also we would like to go to the 21 Barton Early Childhood Center because I have some children 22 that need physical therapy and we could go visit the center 23 while we are there. 24 MS. WEITKUNAT: That's what I needed • 25 clarification. Thank you. 15 1 MR. CHAPMAN: While she's there. A couple more 2 clarifications. In our packet there area couple of 3 references to six, day care students or children. I suspect 4 that that facility is the implication, and I think 5 Mr. Beaver this evening said six is okay, but 12 is not. 6 Are there currently children in day care there? 7 MS. SMITH: At my home? 8 MR. CHAPMAN: Yes. 9 MS. SMITH: No. 10 MR. CHAPMAN: So that reference I guess is just 11 to the fact that you could have six there without getting a 12 permit. 13 MS. SMITH: Right. We do not currently have -- 14 MR. CHAPMAN: The other question I have is in 15 regard to the van. when the van is there at the school 16 after having brought the children in the morning, where will 17 it be parked? 18 MS. SMITH: It will have to be parked in the 19 street in front of our home. 20 MR. CHAPMAN: Okay. Thank you. 21 MS. BELL: Excuse me. I have some additional 22 questions while you are there. I'm just kind of trying to 23 get a feeling from where you're coming from on this. I hope 24 you don't mind these questions. What is it that made you 25 decide to go into this 12 children center when I know that i • • 16 1 you can get a license for a day care home of fewer kids, 2 like approximately six. What -- you know, kind of what's. 3 going into your decision making to go into more children. 4 MS. SMITH: Yes, I understand your question. And 5 we currently attend First Assembly of God and I have been a 6 preschool teacher there for almost three years every Sunday, 7 in addition to taking full-time credits and also full-time 8 work. I have worked there for eight hours every Sunday with 9 kids, and what I found is that there's a lot of children 10 that I would still like to touch their lives and I have 11 considered doing it as a nonprofit organization. 12 So as being a Christian and attending First • 13 Assembly, part of my mission work there is to reach as many 14 children as I possibly can. I have worked with the rates on 15 every child that has expressed interest in coming to the 16 preschool, and I have very reasonable rates and so I would 17 just like to have a school that I could reach as many 18 children as I possibly could, in the area. I already have 19 seven interested; they're right in the area surrounding the 20 home. 21 MS. BELL: Okay. 22 MS. SMITH: And we do have Christian curriculum. 23 MS. BELL: Yeah. That was my next question. The 24 curriculum is fairly structured, then? • 25 MS. SMITH: Yes, it is. 17 1 MS. BELL: So outdoor playtime might be at a 2 specific time each day and indoor activities occur at 3 certain times, things like that? 4 M.S. SMITH: Yes, the parents have come to me and 5 said we are looking for something structured. That's how I 6 run my Sunday School, too, very structured, and it works 7 really well. That's how I know I can limit playtime 8 outside. 9 MS. BELL: Also, kind of typical day care centers 10 are open like from 6:30 to 6:30 at night. Kind of curious 11 how you came to these hours of 7:30 to 5:30. 12 MS. SMITH: Just from the interest that has been 13 shown for the preschool, the parents are mostly working . 14 part-time that are using it and so there's not a reason to 15 have that type of hours. 16 MS. BELL: Okay. I guess that was it. Does 17 anybody else have any questions while she's up front? 18 MR. GAVALDON: Ms. Smith, I would like to touch 19 on the van. It's a 12-passenger van or 15 -- what size? 20 MS. SMITH: Well, if we're going to have 12 21 children, we would like to get a 15 passenger because I'll 22 need to have one other adult in the car with me for safety. 23 MR. GAVALDON: That type of vehicle, I recall, if 24 you can help me, do you require a special license to drive a 25 van with the number of people, seven or eight? • 18 1 MS. SMITH: No. I checked with the driver's 2 license bureau and it needs to seat 16 or more, and a 15 3 passenger van only seats 15. 4 MR. GAVALDON: Right. However, parking it, it's 5 a large vehicle. Have you adequately planned to park it 6 where it will not be such an -- won't just stand right out. 7 Is there any opportunity to park it in a way where it will 8 not stand out and take up some of your parking spots? 9 MS. SMITH: Well, it won't be taking up parking 10 spots, and I need to leave my two driveway spaces for drop 11 off and pick up, but since there is so many people coming, 12 you know, we'll get the van, should the need arise and get • 13 over six full-time children, but the van will have to be 14 parked in the street where all of our neighbors park their 15 cars in front of their houses.- So I would hope the van 16 wouldn't be a problem. 17 MR. GAVALDON: That's all I have. I do have 18 some questions for the realtor and the other individual with 19 the survey. 20 MS. BELL: Are there any other questions for the 21 applicant while she's up front here? Also related to the 22 van, I would suppose that since you have quite a few people 23 within the neighborhood, that even if you got more kids, 24 there might not even be the need for the van unless your • 25 clientele starts coming from other, a lot from other parts 1 of the city. 2 MS. SMITH: Yes; that's what we would like to 3 wait and see, too. Because we're not even close to even 4 having six full-time; so we do have seven part-timers in the 5 area, that's where we're at. 6 MS. BELL: All right. Thank you. 7 MS. WEITKUNAT: Would you clarify part-timer, 8 meaning only three or four hours or something, is that what 9 you mean? 10 MS. SMITH: Yes, morning instruction. 11 MS. WEITKUNAT: Okay. 12 MS. BELL: Okay. Who has other questions? Bob? 13 MR. DAVIDSON: If your clientele changed as far 14 as their needs, as far as hours, how would that impact your 15 running the school and the hours that you have stated right 16 now. Suppose you have quite a few customers that need to 17 have the school open till 6:30 or 7:00 because of where they 18 work or whatever the situation is. 19 MS. SMITH: Should a need like that arise I would 20 have to take it by a case -by -case basis. I mean if a 21 situation in someone's life would stop them from using my 22 facility, then I.may allow that one child to stay over. 23 MR. DAVIDSON: And what would happen, this is 24 just totally hypothetical, suppose you wound up with a whole 25 group of kids that need to stay later, you know, cause this . • zo 1 is going to be an evolving school over the years, so things. 2 may change, client's needs may change. 3 MS. SMITH: Then I would have to turn them away 4 because I have to -- I have a husband and other things I 5 like to do in the evening, as well, so that if that should 6 arise, then I would not be able to serve them. 7 MR. DAVIDSON: Thank you. 8 MS. BELL: Don't you have to meet certain 9 licensing requirements? Would you have to reapply for your 10 license to change the hours and things like that? 11 MS. SMITH: I don't think so unless the City 12 requires it, but the state doesn't require. • 13 MS. WEITKUNAT: One last question, is this also 14 your residence? 15 MS. SMITH: Yes, it is. 16 MS. WEITKUNAT: So you will be living on this 17 property? 18 MS. SMITH: Yes. 19 MS. CRAIG: I wanted to double check, they aren't 20 going to be coming on the weekends. Is that right, the 21 weekends are definitely no children? 22 MS. SMITH: Right. 23 MS. BELL: Okay. Does the Board have any other 24 questions of anyone else? Jerry? Thank you. I think we 25 might be done. 21 1 MR. GAVALDON: I would like to ask Mrs. Buchanan. 2 I would like to ask some questions regarding your 3 observations on market sales and the choices in our, of a 4 person who would want to buy a home with the day care nearby 5 and without, and given the number of inventory we have on 6 the market, they would prefer not to? 7 MS. BUCHANAN: Yes. 8 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Have you had an opportunity 9 to look at the survey that was presented by the first lady, 10 and did you have an opportunity to look at that? 11 MS. BUCHANAN: I didn't have an opportunity to 12 look at it. She did tell me about that because we had 13 discussed it and she was asking my opinion about that. 14 MR. GAVALDON: So would you be more inclined to 15 share your thoughts on the survey? 16 MS. BUCHANAN: Well, I am not real familiar with 17 the survey. I think part of it was, and maybe Deanne can 18 probably talk about the survey, and once I hear a little bit 19 more about it I would be willing to give some more ideas 20 about that. 21 MR. GAVALDON: My intent is to correlate your 22 information to her information to understand the value -- we 23 are not looking at property value, looking at the choices of 24 whether to purchase or not to purchase a home with a day 25 care nearby versus without a day care. So your experience 22 1 says that choices with the inventory that they would not 2 prefer. Is there any other data you can share with us? 3 MS. BUCHANAN: I think there are people with 4 specific needs. If somebody with young children wants to 5 move into a neighborhood that has day care, then it 6 certainly could be an asset, but that isn't generally a 7 request that's made of me. And when I'm out showing 8 property if we drive by something, they'll say, "Oh, is that 9 a day care center?" And I'll say, "Yes." "we don't want to 10 live too close to a day care center." They like having day 11 care centers where they can take their kids but they don't 12 want to live next door or in the same neighborhood, • 13 necessarily. 14 MR. GAVALDON: Good. In your experience have you 15 had any day care centers move into an area and you had homes 16 being sold and bought. Have you had any people say that's 17 been a positive, or have they expressed concern? 18 MS. BUCHANAN: Yes, I have. I also work out in 19 Ridgewood and there's a proposed day care center, and when 20 people bought homes in that area they were told that there 21 was a proposed day care center at that time. Now that's a 22 lot different than somebody moving into an area where they 23 never expect to have one next -door. So it's a very positive 24 thing in the area where you have town homes, condominiums, • 25 and a day care center, and a little shopping center. So 23 1 it's a really nice, type community. I like that aspect of 2 it, but people know what they're getting into. Here they 3 didn't really understand that. 4 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. One more question. Day 5 care centers with say 6 children versus 12, have you had any 6 impact of favorable or no favorable for the larger one 7 versus the smaller one. 8 MS. BUCHANAN: I don't think that there is much 9 of a complaint against smaller day care centers because I 10 think people like to have some place where their neighbor 11 would say, "Can you watch my kids for a couple of hours," 12 and sort of be in a cooperative type of situation. I think 13 when it's a business that's run on a daily basis, that you 14 can't always predict what's going to happen. That, I think, 15 impacts it. 16 MR. GAVALDON: How about a larger one like this 17 one on our proposal? 18 MS. BUCHANAN: Well, that one I think is proposed 19 for 12 and I think that does impact people, because as I 20 heard somebody say, people don't really quite understand, or 21 maybe are frightened of what they don't understand and they 22 haven't seen, but I think enough people in the community 23 have been around day care centers so that it is an educated 24 fear that it might have some impact on their property 25 values. 0 • 24 1 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. Thank you. If I can ask 2 Ms. Deanne. Hello. 3 MS. SCHROEDER: Hi. 4 MR. GAVALDON: Could you share with us some 5 comments or observations that your survey had shared, even 6 though we know the numbers, we reviewed them, can you share 7 any questions -- no, comments or concerns that you may have 8 picked up in your survey. 9 MS. SCHROEDER: I think probably one of the 10 biggest concerns would be, is how I generated the survey and 11 how valid the data is. I am a graduate student at Colorado 12 State University. I have an undergraduate business degree, • 13 so I'm -- I've had experience, as well as education in the 14 construction and analysis of surveys. So basically what I 15 did is I titled it, Home Buying Survey. I put ten 16 questions, ten random questions about just home buying 17 practices, together, and then a number of people assisted me 18 in just actually distributing this in a random basis. 19 So no information was provided to the people who 20 we requested fill out the survey so that it would be 21 unbiased to begin with, because certainly I am most 22 interested -- I want real information, I wasn't trying to 23 sway it either way. I'm looking for real information 24 because if nobody had any concerns with a preschool located • 25 next -door and they wouldn't, they would buy the house, then 25 1 that would be great for me, then I guess that would kind of 2 allay my fears a little bit. 3 So basically, I asked a number of questions about 4 if they were a homeowner, rank purchasing criteria for the 5 home, just basically some general home buying questions. 6 And what I did find is that the location and the 7 neighborhood was really a big factor in a lot of people 8 purchasing homes, certainly that's a big factor when I 9 purchase homes. In addition, of course, to price and all of 10 the other things that we consider. 11 So one of the questions in the middle of the 12 survey was, "Would you be willing to purchase a home located 13 next -door to an in -home day care with 12 children." And 14 then also, "Would you be willing to purchase a home in the 15 same neighborhood." Because I thought that was a good 16 question too, if it wasn't just next -door, if the day care 17 was maybe down the street or around the corner where it 18 wouldn't affect you directly, -or maybe impact traffic right 19 next -door to your home or right in front of your home. I 20 wanted to get that information, too. So I hope that's what 21 you're looking for. 22 MR. GAVALDON: Partially. Did you have any 23 comments about a day care with, say, less than 12, like 6, 24 8. 25 MS. SCHROEDER: I didn't put that information in 0 26 1 my survey, I just included 12 children. 2 MR. GAVALDON: Okay. All right. That's all I 3 have. Thank you. 4 MS. SCHROEDER: And if I can make one comment 5 about the van because I know, it sounds to me like that's 6 one of the big factors in your decision, because that would 7 significantly impact the -- 8 MS. BELL: Is it a brief comment? 9 MS. SCHROEDER: It's a very brief comment. 10 MS. BELL: All right. 11 MS. SCHROEDER: I guess I'm not sure and I guess • 12 one of the big concerns, they did express their intent to 13 purchase a van, but I know that a 15-passenger van probably 14 is fairly expensive, on the neighborhood of probably 25 to 15 $30,000. And I don't know if there is any type of legal 16 obligation for them to do so. And just recently I know that 17 they are currently using lower -grade building material which 18 is against the covenants and the only reason that I can 19 actually think that they would do that is because of the 20 cost reason. I guess I'm a little concerned that maybe, I 21 don't know anything about their financial situation, but I'm 22 a little concerned that they might not be able to afford a 23 big 15-passenger van. 24 MS. BELL: Any other -- • 25 MR. CHAPMAN: Further questions for Deanne. You 27 1 mentioned that you work and does your husband also work? 2 MS. SCHROEDER: Yes, we both work at Symbios 3 Logic. 4 MR. CHAPMAN: And do you work daytime or 5 nighttime? 6 MS. SCHROEDER** Daytime. 7 MR. CHAPMAN: Daytime. So typically you would 8 not be there during the day. 9 MS. SCHROEDER: Typically we both would not. But 10 I do take classes at the University during the day and I 11 also study, so I kind of am on a little flexible schedule at 12 work. 13 MR. CHAPMAN: Okay. Thank you. 14 MS. BELL: Are there other Board questions? 15 Alex? 16 MR. CHAPMAN: Yes, I have a question of staff. 17 Paul, specifically. Having worked on the writing of City 18 Plan, I think I understand some of the material that's in 19 City Plan, and it's my recollection that we specifically 20 wanted to encourage neighborhoods to have mixed -uses to 21 include things like day care and other services that people 22 need in their neighborhoods. 23 And there are a lot of what we consider to be 24 good reasons to have that kind of mixed neighborhood, not 25 the least of which is to reduce the amount of vehicle miles 0 • 2s 1 traveled that people have to subject the city to, to get to 2 the services they need. And then, specifically, the code 3 was written from those goals and objectives that came out of 4 City Plan, and I believe the code, specifically, provides 5 for, that is, permits day care centers to be established in 6 the RL zone which this is in. 7 And so it occurs to me that the Board is under 8 an obligation to abide by those codes in this ruling, and 9 the other side of the question is we have heard several 10 examples of possible deterioration of real estate values. 11 Does the Board have an obligation to homeowners to somehow • 12 maintain, assure, or guarantee the continued growth of the 13 value of their properties? 14 MR. ECKMAN: No, it does not. 15 MS. BELL: I have a question to piggyback on 16 that. When you were working on the goals and objectives and 17 the code and everything and it talked about provision of day 18 care in neighborhoods, was there any discussion, did it get 19 specific down to in -home, you know, like the six and under 20 licensed homes or 12, you know, now we're talking about 12, 21 or was it just talking about like a regular facility, day 22 care facility like 25 kids or more. I mean could, do you 23 have any -- 24 MR. ECKMAN: I think Leanne can help with that • 25 because she worked on that committee. • 30 1 question, please, in regards to traffic. From looking at 2 the vicinity map, etc., it looks like the local street is 3 also possibly a street that the children use to walk to the 4 elementary school. Is there somebody who maybe can confirm 5 that or not confirm it? 6 MS. HARTER: I will assume, yes, that's the 7 answer, but Fred Jones, Traffic Operations is here and I 8 will get him to confirm that or deny that. 9 MR. JONES: Madam Chair, members of the Board, my 10 name is Fred Jones, I'm in Traffic Operations. Ms. Craig, 11 that is correct. That is a local street and it is in the • 12 Bauder Elementary School area, and kids would be walking to 13 school down that street. 14 MS. CRAIG: I don't know what the school hours 15 are. Would they be walking between 7:30 and 8:00? Do we 16 know that, is that a school time? 17 MS. HARTER: I'm not aware what the hours are for 18 that school. 19 MR. JONES: We have two schools in the area. we 20 have the Blevins Junior High which operates at 7:50 in the 21 morning until 2:30, I believe. The elementary school at 22 Bauder operates, I believe it's 7:55 in the morning until 23 2:55 p.m. 24 MS. CRAIG: Okay. So we do have children that • 25 are going to be walking on that street as these parents are 31 1 dropping off their children; is what we are coming up with 2 so far? 3 MR. JONES: Yes, but I'm not sure how many kids 4 live in that district that would be walking. 5 MS. CRAIG: Okay. So most of them bus, is 6 that -- 7 MR. JONES: No. It would be a walking school to 8 Bauder. I think it's within that district, in that range. 9 MS. CRAIG: Great. Thank you. 10 MR. CHAPMAN: Fred, while you're there, are you 11 aware of any structural defects, if that's the correct word, 12 of that street, that would cause it to be unsafe if there 13 were even as many as a dozen more cars per day, morning and 14 evening using it. That is, would it threaten the safety of 15 the school children walking down the street? 16 MR. JONES: It's a local street. It's carrying 17 well under, probably well under a thousand vehicles, but 18 probably under 500 vehicles per day. It recently was 19 connected back over to the Somerville Road there to Ross 20 Drive. There probably has been a noticeable.increase in 21 traffic over the summer months since, just in the last 22 couple of weeks since that road, actually connection was 23 completed. It's designed to handle a thousand vehicles per 24 day. The impacts of approximately 30 vehicles per day would 25 not severely impact the roadway. • 32 . 1 MS. WEITKUNAT: The question I had on that was 2 the pedestrians and so on. Is not one side of that fenced 3 totally and there is no access from, is it the east side? 4 Can you see that on the slide -- the east side of Somerville 5 is totally fenced in so there is no access to this street? 6 MR. JONES: There is access, now; back over to 7 Larch, that would be to the west and to the east you would 8 hit, I believe it's Crestridge. 9 MS. WEITKUNAT: But this block across from the 10 day care has a fence the length of the block? 11 MS. HARTER: I'm sorry. Could you repeat that, • 12 please. 13 MS. WEITKUNAT: On the east side across from this 14 site, the fence that we are looking at, runs the length of 15 this block across from the -- 16 MS. HARTER: I don't believe it does. I think 17 it's the rear of the house you're seeing there. We can find 18 another shot that might show it. There, you can see it on 19 the left of the screen, there. The grass area and then the 20 fence begins. It's approximately right across the street 21 from the house, I believe. 22 MS. WEITKUNAT: Okay. 23 MS. BELL: I just have one last question of you, 24 Paul. In the code, what does it state regarding parking for • 25 a facility of this nature, and, you know, we have heard 33 1 about the van parking in the street and there is potentially 2 one employee. Could you kind of review that for the Board, 3 please. 4 MR. ECKMAN: Yes, the parking requirements are -- 5 I can't find this -- 3.2.2 and subparagraph K, parking lots. 6 And for child care centers it says, "For each child care 7 center there shall be one parking space per four." Well, 8 that's for, this is for churches and other things, so I'll 9 -- four seats in an auditorium, place of worship. Two 10 parking spaces per three employees, so the rule is two 11 parking spaces per three employees or one parking space per 12 1,000 square feet of floor area, whichever requires the 13 greatest number of parking spaces of those two criteria. 14 Two per three employees or one space per thousand square 15 feet of floor area. 16 MS. BELL: Okay. Question of staff, if there is 17 a double car garage and the employee was going to park in 18 the garage, okay, and I suppose they have their own vehicle 19 in the garage, and then the van potentially outside, and 20 then the.driveway which could take a couple vehicles on drop 21 off, and then otherwise they have to use the local street 22 for additional cars. 23 MS. HARTER: That's correct. 24 MS. BELL: So maybe a maximum of two cars could 25 be at that facility that don't belong there. That would be 0 • 34 1 parents. If the employee is in the garage and there's a 2 double car garage so -- 3 MR. BLANCHARD: I think you have to differentiate 4 between parking as a full-time use of a space or a long term 5 use of the space as opposed to someone who might be dropping 6 off or picking up children. That would be equivalent to a 7 drive -up area. You know, to load in a commercial 8 establishment. So I'm not, it's my impression that you 9 should differentiate in consideration of that issue in 10 parking of who's going to be there for long term versus who 11 might be there for five minutes dropping off a child or • 12 picking up a child. 13 MS. BELL: Okay. is there someone who is ready to 14 make a motion? 15 MS. WEITKUNAT: I'll give you a motion. I'll 16 recommend approval of the Seedlings Preschool and Daycamo. 17 Is there a number? Project Development Plan and File Plan 18 Number 6582 AC. It does meet the permitted uses in the land 19 use code. It does meet the applicable standards as set 20 forth in the code, and I believe it is compatible with the 21 surrounding land uses. 22 MS. BELL: Is there a second? 23 MR. CHAPMAN: Second. 24 MS. BELL: Moved and seconded. Do we have any • 25 further comments or discussion at this point? Bob? 35 .1 MR. DAVIDSON: Well. I agree on principle on 2 neighborhood child care centers. But what I have noticed is 3 most child care centers tend to be on busier streets or at 4 intersections where busier streets intersect. And I have 5 got to say, myself, I don't think 12 children in an 6 isolated, quiet neighborhood is real appropriate. I worked 7 with kids for years and 12 kids confined in one yard is a 8 lot of noise, and I think in ter..i= of a seller or buyer, or 9 seller's market, I think it will limit potential buyers for 10 neighbors immediate to that day care center when you're 11 talking 12 children. 12 If it were a smaller child care center, I don't 13 think it would be such an impact. Another thing that comes 14 to mind is having a dog of my own, or a couple dogs, in the 15 past, when you have a lot of kids in the neighborhood, or in 16 the yard next to you, that can really trigger the dog to 17 bark all day long. And the next thing you know you're 18 getting summons for your dog barking, and noise control is 19 down there and the Humane Society is giving you a summons. 20 I got to say I don't think that is too fair to somebody who 21 has a dog that normally doesn't bark, but then with all 22 those kids it just serves as a catalyst for that dog to keep 23 going all day long. A lot of times they just want to go 24 over there and be with the kids, or see what's going on, but 25 it does present some real problems. • 36 1 I'm bound by code even though I am not real 2 thrilled about this situation. If I were a neighbor who 3 lived in the neighborhood like that, and I was looking for a 4 quiet neighborhood to relax on a nice, sunny day, maybe I 5 was retired, or maybe I worked different hours, I might not 6 be real happy about having '12 kids running around making a 7 lot of racket. I realize a lot of this would be structured, 8 but still, 12 kids is a pretty high decibel and it's pretty 9 distracting over a period of time. 10 I guess my feeling is that what I'm going to look 11 into is to seeing that City Plan maybe is a little bit more • 12 specific about how we deal with day care centers. I think 13 they should be in the neighborhoods, but I think there 14 should be a little more specific criteria to how we locate 15 them and where we -locate them within the neighborhoods, for 16 the sake of all property owners because not everybody is 17 real thrilled about a lot of kids next to them. 18 And I do think it will limit the buyers for your 19 property, which then does present a problem when you go to 20 sell your house. I don't think it will impact the value of 21 the house so much, it's the potential market to sell that 22 house I think it will impact most. And that would be my 23 main concern if I were an owner of a house that might sell 24 in the future. So I will be voting on this, I will be • 25 voting, yes, on this, unfortunately, because code, I am 37 1 bound by code, that's the way we have written this into the 2 code, but I do not agree with this code. I think it needs 3 to be changed and modified so that it's fair for everyone. 4 MR. GAVALDON: I, too, am ooina to gnnnnrt tho 5 motion, but I'm going to express some reservations and 6 concerns. I believe the applicant has a lot of effort to 7 work on to bring about some harmony in her neighborhood and 8 to meet the conditions that she has set forth, and do 9 include the neighbors if there are concerns and address them 10 promptly, and do follow your covenants, as well to make sure 11 that you have a good neighbor policy. Because I feel like 12 Bob has expressed, that there are some opportunities in City 13 Plan on this. 14 But because of the code and all that, I feel that 15 it does meet all the criteria set out in the motions and I 16 will be supporting it, but I feel that there is some 17 opportunity in respect to your good neighbor will, as I will 18 say, to ensure that there is no adverse concerns brought up 19 and that we do not have to go through any violations or 20 anything. But I do feel that the efforts you have put forth 21 are sound and would like to see it progress. 22 MR. ECKMAN: Hearing some of the comments that 23 the Board members are making, I just wanted to call to your 24 attention the step nine provisions in the land use code. 25 Step nine deals with conditions of approval and it provides • 38 1 that the decision maker may impose such conditions on 2 approval of the development application as;are necessary to 3 accomplish the purposes and intent of this land use code as 4 long as the conditions have reasonable nexus to the impacts 5 of the development, and are roughly proportional to that. 6 So then from that, also, you find in 1.2.2, a 7 list of purposes, quite a number of them, one of them, 8 though, is that the development proposals are sensitive to 9 the character of existing neighborhoods, and so on. So from 10 that I would suggest to you not that you need to, but that 11 you may consider conditions, so long as they promote the • 12 purposes of the land use code, and hours of operation, for 13 example, might be one of those types of things that you 14 could consider in your deliberations and take amendment to 15 the motion at this point if you wanted to do that. But I 16 didn't want that to go without saying, that you can do 17 conditional approvals as long as they promote the purposes 18 of the land use code. 19 MS. BELL: Any other Board comments. Sally? 20 MS. CRAIG: I want to check. In our packet 21 there is a referral to a group home and I think, I don't 22 know if a condition was put on or whether it's in the land 23 use code, but it stated that when the group home, the 24 original owner of the group home no longer owned the • 25 premise, or the business closed down, that the next person 39 - 1 had to reapply. Does this at all fit, or can we put a 2 condition that if this day care person sells, or no longer 3 is a day care center, that the next person has to come 4 through the Board again. 5 MS. HARTER: I will answer that, but I need to 6 find it in the code, here. 7 MS. CRAIG: I also wanted to bring up. I 8 understand that the neighbors feelings, as far as property 9 value, I want to make it clear to them that as a Board, that 10 is beyond our authority. Property value is something that 11 we can't rule on, but you do have in your neighborhood, you 12 have a homeowner's association and they put covenants on a 13 lot of, you know, your fence, your bushes, etc. 14 From this survey I definitely get the feeling 15 that I would pursue that avenue. I would go to the 16 homeowner's association and possibly look into this becoming 17 a future covenants if you want just six children day care 18 centers in your neighborhood and limit the 12. You can go 19 that direction and possibly they could help you more than we 20 can. 21 MS. HARTER: In the land use code, Section, 22 3.8.6, group home regulations, Subsection 5, it states, "If 23 active and continuous operations are not carried on in a 24 group home which was approved pursuant to the provisions 25 contained in this section for a period of 12 consecutive • 40 1 months, the group home shall be considered to have been 2 abandoned. The group home use can be reinstated only.after 3 obtaining a new approval from the decision -maker as outlined 4 in this section." And again, that is specifically for group 5 homes. 6 MS. CRAIG: So that's not for day care centers. 7 MS. HARTER: No. 8 MS. CRAIG : Only group homes. Okay. 9 MS. BELL: Are there any other further comments? 10 MR. DAVIDSON:. So Paul, I would like to know one 11 thing, could we -- could there be a condition that once this 12 property was sold, that would be the day care center now, • 13 could there be a condition that it couldn't transfer to the 14 next owner unless they reapply to P and Z? 15 MR. ECKMAN: Since land use code doesn't 16 specifically address that as it did with the group homes, I 17 would advise against that because the decision is probably 18 best characterized as a land use decision and not one based 19 on personalities. I think it would be best for you to avoid 20 that kind of condition, but rather you might want to focus 21 on some condition that deals with how the home is operated, 22 not who operates the home. 23 MR. DAVIDSON: I guess, then, one condition I 24 would like to throw in there if it would be considered • 25 friendly would be that this day care center is limited, not 41 1 only this day care center, but if it carries over to another 2 owner of the same house later on, that it would have the 3 same hours and wouldn't have the opportunity to change those 4 hours to a wider window, and I'd like to maybe get some 5 feedback from everybody and see how they felt about it. 6 MR CHAPMAN: I'd like to respond to the motion, 7 I mean to the suggested amendment condition, and that is 8 that I think what you're really trying to get at is the 9 disturbing affect that it may have on the neighborhood, more 10 so with perhaps than the hours that it operates. For 11 example, it occurs to me that maybe a child within walking 12 distance would need to walk over to this facility at 6:30 in 13 the morning, and certainly the pitter-patter of little feet 14 upon the sidewalk would not be a grievous situation. 15 And so I think if we want to make a condition, it 16 should be addressed more in the direction of a grievous 17 noise condition that's not already addressed by existing 18 city noise codes, or if, in fact, the other concern that I 19 think sounds to be one that we can address here, is if 20 traffic, in fact, becomes a grievous situation, I'm not 21 aware -- perhaps you can help me with this Fred, but I'm not 22 aware of a city code that would give neighbors a direct 23 access to address an increase in traffic there unless, it 24 goes beyond any expectation we have here. So I suggest, 25 Bob, that the condition might address noise and possible lJ • 42 1 traffic conjestion. 2 MR. DAVIDSON: I would agree, not just sure how 3 we would word that. I do have real concerns for, you know, 4 it's not only this child care center, but if it carried over 5 to another owner later on. There's no guarantee that you're 6 going to have this same type of person who is trying'to work 7 with the neighbors and trying to make sure that the nature 8 of that neighborhood remains the way it is. So I'm not sure 9 how we would go about wording it for the noise. You know, 10 we have decibel levels for some things, but I don't know how 11 you would apply that here. Anybody have any suggestions? • 12 MS. WEITKUNAT: Is that a compatiblity issue, 13 possible noise and traffic? 14 MR. ECKMAN: Noise would be difficult. I'm 15 starting to sympathize with the staff in terms of how to 16 enforce a condition dealing with decibels of noise or for 17 that matter, traffic. If you're going to go out and count 18 cars, then you'll have to prove which ones used were 19 traveling -- it would be hard to adminster. A condition 20 that might be easier would be to impose some kind of hours 21 of limitation on how long the children might be allowed to 22 play outside, or I don't know, if that's the noise, that 23 kind of gets at the noise issue but it may be seen by the 24 Board and by the applicant as being too controlling in terms • 25 of how they operate the day care center, too. 43 1 MS. WEITKUNAT: I guess as the maker of the 2 motion I hear what you're saying, but I also heard the 3 applicant and the information that's here and I have a great 4 sense of her sense of sensibility and sensitivity to her 5 neighborhood. I don't see the intrusion to the extreme of 6 some of the things we are talking about, but I understand 7 what she has been presenting to us and I think she is aware 8 that she is under the scrutiny of the neighbors and I don't 9 know that there is a necessity to impose restrictions on it 10 because I sense that she has a sense of what is happening in 11 her neighborhood. 12 MS. BELL: So are you saying the. maker of the 13 motion does not accept that? 14 MS. WEITKUNAT: I do not accept what I'm hearing 15 yet, no. 16 MR. DAVIDSON: I'm not so concerned about the 17 present applicant. What my concern is if somebody else 18 moves in, later, and takes advantage of being able to have a 19 day care center, they may not be as sensible to the 20 neighborhood and then what can the neighborhood do about it. 21 That's my concern. There is no guarantee that the next 22 person will have those sensibilities. That's of course 23 hypothetical, but -- 24 MS. WEITKUNAT: In response, we have heard this 25 is a mission she has taken on herself and I'm not sure that • 44 1 it's an adventure into the world of business and ecomomics, 2 per se, for a profit -making day care. This is nonprofit. 3 It's related to her goals and her mission and I see it 4 fairly individualized. 5 MR. DAVIDSON: Only thing I'm saying is that 6 somebody else in the future, if they saw that she already 7 had gone through the process, gotten permission to have a 8 day care center, then that would be an easy in for them and 9 you may not get that same mentality. That's my concern. 10 MS. BELL: Since the maker of the motion is not 11 agreeable to it, the other option would be to vote against • 12 it and start again, if that's what you want to do, but at 13 this point we do have a motion on the floor. Are there any 14 other comments that anyone would like to make? I guess I 15 would like to make a comment about this. I guess I do hear 16 what people are saying and I'm somewhat sympathetic, and 17 perhaps we do need to look in the code and see if we need to 18 tighten up that a little bit. 19 However, on the other hand, I have lived in a 20 neighborhood with a group home right across the street. It 21 worked out just fine and many neighborhoods in our community 22 have day care homes, they have group homes and all sorts of 23 businesses that live right next to them. I think I have to 24 agree with the one gentleman that got up to speak. 25 It sounds a little difficult when you first try 45 1 to wrap your mind around it, but I think in a pretty short 2 period of time, you know, everybody will adapt to it and 3 you'll find it's really not quite as difficult of a 4 situation as it sounds like. I also ran a day care home at 5 one point in a neighborhood in this community and really had 6 absolutely no problems with it. So I'm going to be 7 supporting this motion as it is. 8 MR. DAVIDSON: I will still be supporting it, 9 because like I said, it meets all the criteria that we have 10 at present. I don't know what else to say. Other than I 11 would say the neighbors probably should pursue the covenants 12 because that's probably the most control you have over your 13 own neighborhood. Those covenants can be enforced very 14 strictly, and if you have some concerns, maybe get with this 15 time, see how it works, and if you're not happy with it, 16 then I'd look to getting covenants written up that the 17 neighborhood approves that would maybe restrict, or at least 18 confine, how large a day care center could be. 19 MS. BELL: Could we have a vote, please. 20 THE CLERK: Gavaldon. 21 MR. GAVALDON: Yes. 22 THE CLERK: Davidson. 23 MR. DAVIDSON: Yes. 24 THE CLERK: Weitkunat. 25 MS. WEITKUNAT: Yes. 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 46 THE CLERK: Craig. MS. CRAIG: Yes. THE CLERK: Chapman. MR. CHAPMAN: Yes. THE CLERK: Bell. MS. BELL: Yes. Approval has been granted for the Seedlings Preschool 6-0. We're going to take a short ten minute break in between this project and the next one, so the Board will be back at ten minutes till eight. (Matter concluded.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 H. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 STATE OF COLORADO ) COUNTY OF LARIMER ) 47 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE I, Dafawn D. Kinne, a Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public, State of Colorado, hereby certify that the foregoing hearing, taken in the matter of Seedlings Preschool and Daycamp, was held on Thursday, August 21, 1997, at 300 West Laporte Avenue, Colorado; that said proceedings were transcribed by me from videotape to the foregoing 46 pages; that said transcript is, to the best of my ability to transcribe same, an accurate and complete record of the proceedings so taken. I further certify that I am not related to, employed by, nor of counsel to any of the parties or attorneys herein nor otherwise interested in the outcome of the case. Attested to by me this 24th day of September, 1997. Dafawn lD. Kinne PUBLIC 140 West Oak Street, Suite 266 9. O� Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 (970) 482-1506 MyCommission Expires J une. 19, 200 • Planning and Zoning Board Minutes August 21, 1997 Page 2 Project: Willox Crossing PUD - Preliminary Case #: #72-84A Project Description: Request for a 4,100 square foot fast-food restaurant (with drive-thru)/convenience store/gas station on approximately 2.175 acres. The property is located at the southwest corner of North College Avenue and Willox Lane. The property is zoned CN, Commercial, North College. Staff Recommendation: Approval Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: • Member Weitkunat removed herself from the discussion due to a conflict of interest. Mike Ludwig, City Planner gave the staff presentation recommending approval. Jim Marlow, Architectural Coordinator for McDonald's Corporation gave the applicant's presentation. He gave a history of the project, reviewed the site plan, improvements to Willox Lane and College Avenue, stormwater improvements, existing trees on the site, and pedestrian access. Gregg Jones, McDonald's Project Manager spoke about the overall development of the site. Member Chapman asked Mr. Jones to show him the internal circulation of someone going through the fast food drive-thru. Mr. Jones discussed the internal circulation and stated that with the median construction on College, there will not be northbound traffic access to the site without first going through the left turn light. They would then travel left bound on Willow and make another left into the property. He stated that there are two drive thrus and enough room for the stacking of 9 cars. He also reviewed the access of someone just purchasing gas. • Member Gavaldon asked Mr. Jones to discuss the performance of the other 4 sites they have developed. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes August 21, 1997 Page 3 Mr. Jones reviewed the performance and location of other sites similar to this one. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Julie Ireland, 1601 N. College Avenue stated that she is responsible for the petition circulation. She asked why there was a need for another gas station and fast food site to be located on a third corner of that intersection. She was concerned with traffic, environmental impacts, pedestrian safety, garbage disposal in their area, noise and air pollution, and cut-thru traffic in their neighborhood. She discussed some conditions that they felt McDonalds should meet: • No thru traffic in their private neighborhoods. • No fast-food trash on their personal property. • No parked cars with loud radios in the fast food parking lot. • Safety for pedestrians, handicapped persons, and senior citizens who live in the area. • Safety against speeding drivers thru their neighborhoods. Don Butler, business owner at 1415 N. College, and a member of the North College Business Association, approximately 60 members, stated that the majority of the people that belong to the association are in favor of the project. He felt that the corner is an eyesore and thought that this development would be a good neighbor and a good addition to North College. He asked the Board to approve the project. Jack Odum, representing the current owner of the property gave a history of the site and the many years of trying to develop this parcel. He asked the Board for approval of the project, which he felt would be a great addition to North College. Jim Mokler, Real Estate Broker and marketer of this property for the last 12 years stated his difficulties marketing this property. He reviewed some of the problems with this property including easements, the trees and being located on North College. He expressed how diligent and patient McDonald's has been through this process and to find someone else to do that would not be easy. He encouraged the Board's support. Chuck Dickson, part owner of the Total Station across the street spoke about what he felt was an unfair approach to the recommendation by the Planning Department on this project compared to his own experience. Mr. Dickson spoke about the building configuration and gas pumps facing College Avenue, when Total was denied, and had fought vehemently, to the moving of the gas pumps and canopy from the frontage on College. He stated that they had indicated that they would like a drive-thru at their site, but were also denied. He felt that a different set of standards are being applied to this project versus what was applied to his store. • Planning and Zoning Board Minutes August 21, 1997 Page 4 Bob Anderson, owner of property on Willow Court felt the plan was an excellent plan. He felt the turn lanes were a needed improvement on Willox Lane. Del Anderson, owner of property on North College felt that any improvement on North College helps any business on North College. He felt the improvements to the intersection of Willox and College are a needed improvement. Mr. Anderson read into the record a letter from Dean Hoag, business owner on North College who could not be present at the hearing. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION CLOSED Member Gavaldon asked for clarification on the process that this project was subject to and the process that the Total development went through. Planner Ludwig replied that he was the project planner on both projects. He cited the differences in the two projects. He stated that the original orientation of the buildings that Total proposed had the gas station/convenience store in the middle of the site, a car wash to the south, and the gas pumps at the corner of College and Willox. There • was a drive-thru lane for the car wash that ran along College Avenue, to the west of the convenience store. Due to pedestrian access to the building, staff suggested that they move the building to the corner of the site in a reverse layout mode, which would enable pedestrian access directly from the corner without crossing any parking or drive- thru lanes. Planner Ludwig went on to say that the Total plan was submitted prior to the adoption of the Highway Commercial Standards for development on North College. There was the North College Plan at that time, but there was no design standards for the North College area. Staff was left to negotiate with the applicant, based on the LDGS criteria. He reviewed some of the differences in the two sites, the trees, the Greeley water line, the detention area, and the easements. Mr. Ludwig stated that the request for a right only turn lane into their site and access onto College Avenue is controlled by the State. Total is part of the Country Club Corners Shopping Center, which has an access to the south, and the State would not allow another access along College Avenue for that. The access McDonald's has on College Avenue is an existing access, and is also a shared access with the property to the south. Planner Ludwig stated as far as their request for a drive -up, as was noted, prior to the Highway Commercial Standards being adopted, as part of that adoption, the Planning and Zoning Board made a very specific point that they wanted any drive-thru facilities to • come back to the Board on North College Avenue. Fast food restaurants that propose a drive-thru have to come to the Board. That is why the McDonald's proposal is here tonight, if it did not propose a drive-thru, it would have been an administrative review. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes August 21, 1997 Page 5 Member Gavaldon discussed safety, frequency, and hours of delivery of gasoline and food products. Member Chapman asked about cut-thru traffic in the mobile home park. Fred Jones, Transportation Department responded that there has not been a survey of why traffic uses that cut-thru, nor has the mobile home park contacted traffic operations as to their concerns with that issue. Mr. Jones stated that he did not see why the addition of this development would increase cut-thru traffic in the mobile home park. Chairperson Bell asked to review the pedestrian circulation of the site. Planner Ludwig reviewed the pedestrian circulation including sidewalks and bikelanes. He stated that the intersection would be upgraded to provide a pedestrian access. He reviewed access into and out of the site. Chairperson Bell asked Mr. Ludwig to review the solar orientation of the building. Planner Ludwig replied that they achieved the points necessary to claim 2 points on the point chart. Member Chapman asked who would be responsible for the trash on the site. Mr. Jones replied that McDonald's is 100% responsible for the cleanup of the outside lot. Member Gavaldon asked about the off -site parking and was there a prevailing need for it and could it be more looked at as greenbelt area. Mr. Jones replied that they were open to that. Planner Ludwig stated that the parking was included to meet the point chart requirement. If the Board sees fit to eliminate that parking, they would drop below the minimum 50% to 48%, which would require a variance from the Board. Member Gavaldon made a motion to recommend approval of a variance to Criterion 4 of the Auto Related and Roadside Commercial Uses Point Chart for the Willox Crossing PUD, Preliminary, #72-82A based on the fact that granting the variance would neither be detrimental to the public good nor impair the intent and purposes of the LDGS; and that a plan excluding the offsite parking and achieving 46% of the maximum applicable points would be equal to or better than . Planning and Zoning Board Minutes August 21, 1997 Page 6 a plan including the off -site parking and exceeding the minimum required 50%. Also to include the addition of three additional parking spaces with the closure of the 36' wide drive to the eliminated parking spaces. Member Davidson seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0. Member Chapman moved to approved the Willow Crossing PUD, Preliminary, #72-82A. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0. Other Business: • There was none. The meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m.