HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 09/21/2000Chairperson Colton called the meeting to order at 6:37 p.m.
Roll Call: Colton, Bernth, Craig, Gavaldon, Carpenter, Meyer and Torgerson.
Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Fuchs, Bracke, Virata, McCallum, Schlueter, Durkin
and Dairies.
Agenda Review: Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent
and Discussion Agendas:
Consent Agenda:
1. Minutes of the May 18, and August 17, 2000 Planning and
Zoning Board Hearings. (Continued).
2. Modification of Conditions of Final Approval
Discussion Agenda:
3. #8-99B Willowbrook — Overall Development Plan
4. #12-97C Harmony Technology Park — Amended Overall Development
Plan
5. Recommendation to City Council on The Mason Street
Transportation Corridor Master Plan
Member Gavaldon moved for approval of Consent Item 2.
Member Torgerson seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 2
Project: Willowbrook Overall Development Plan, #8-99B
Project Description: Request for an approximate 112 acre Mixed -Use
Overall Development Plan consisting of high and low
density residential and neighborhood commercial
uses. The site is located west of Strauss Cabin Road
(County Road 7) and bound on Kechter Road (County
Road 36) on it's southern boundary. The site lies
within the Fossil Creek Reservoir Area Plan and is
zoned LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood.
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Ron Fuchs, City Planner gave the staff presentation. Planner Fuchs reviewed for the
Board the criteria under the Land Use Code for the review of an Overall Development
Plan. Planner Fuchs reviewed site shots of the proposed property, the surrounding
roads, boundaries and the general site layout of the property. The applicant has
requested alternative compliance in a number of areas for a 660 grid, for traffic
vehicular movements, and has shown them on the respective plan. Planner Fuchs
stated that the proposed densities were from 12 units per acre down to about 3. He
stated that staff was recommending approval of the requested alternative compliance of
Sections 3.6.1 and 3.6.3. Staff was recommending approval of the Overall
Development Plan with a note that all vehicular and non -vehicular movement corridors
and paths will be evaluated with upon subsequent project development plans within the
Willowbrook ODP, including connectivity through the site east, west, south, and north.
Brad Bennett, CEO of Chateau Development Company, applicant on the project
introduced his team.
Craig Kam, Director of Planning for Nutzer Kopaz Urban Design Associates gave the
applicant's presentation. Mr. Kam spoke about and reviewed the proposed uses on the
property being approved uses in the LMN District. He also spoke about density on the
site, types of products, contiguity requirements per the Fossil Creek Planning Area,
Master Street Plan requirements, pedestrian walkways, neighborhood park, natural
areas on the site, compliance with the Fossil Creek Master Plan Drainage area and
stormwater detention on the site.
Member Craig asked about the timeline of the project.
Planning and Zoning
September 21, 2000
Page 3
Board Minutes
Mr. Bennett replied that if the project is approved, they would
construction in the spring of 2001 and it would be their goal to
spring of 2002. He estimates the build out to be 5 to 7 years.
Member Craig asked what would be in Phase I.
Mr. Bennett replied that B, D, E and part of F on the site plan.
Public Input
None.
begin land development
have models open in the
Member Gavaldon asked again for a brief synopsis of the alternative compliance
request.
Planner Fuchs responded that the applicant was requesting to deviate from a strict one
street every 660 feet. The request would exceed the standard by about 200 feet. The
differences in those linear footages is based upon providing additional open space
areas and buffer yards for the out parcels that are presently within the County. It would
help mitigate, transition and also provide some stormwater detention areas for future
developments. The applicant is also requesting alternative compliance on the northeast
corner to facilitate the alignment of Rock Creek Drive.
Member Craig asked about the streets in the stand-alone ODP, she was concerned
about the streets going nowhere. She asked for clarification that Cinquefoil to the south
down to County Road 36 was the only way in and out of this site.
Mr. Kam responded that there was another project coming in for review after this one,
which is the Harmony Technology Park Amended Overall Development Plan, and that
project lies directly to the north and west of this project. As a part of that project, in
which they are also the applicants, the Cambridge and Cinquefoil connection to
Harmony Road will be made. If that project is approved it is their plan to begin work
simultaneously with the development of this project. They have entered into an
agreement with Hewlett Packard and Amago for building Cambridge and Cinquefoil to
Harmony Road. It is their plan with both projects that they would be completing
Cambridge from Rock Creek to Harmony, Cinquefoil from Rock Creek to Harmony, and
the Rock Creek connection between Cambridge and Cinquefoil.
Mark McCallum, Engineering Department added that staffs direction was to punch
Rock Creek out, it just has not been finalized. This was the first time that he has heard
that this PDP would start its phasing on the north boundary. Punching out Rock Creek
has not yet been talked about with this PDP, although it has been talked about with the
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September21, 2000
Page 4
PDP that is in the Harmony Tech Park project. Staffs position, and it has been made
clear to the applicant, is that Rock Creek would be punched out to provide a re-
circulation route so that all the traffic would not be dumped out onto Harmony Road at
this time. Cinquefoil is not a guarantee, nor is the Cambridge connection, because it is
all based on CDOT approval. Cinquefoil is not a desirable one at this time. Cambridge
would be, and we are looking to use Cambridge and Rock Creek, but it has not been
finalized with the applicant or CDOT.
Member Craig stated that this ODP is not showing Rock Creek punched out to Ziegler
Road. This ODP shows only one way out, which is Cambridge.
Mr. McCallum agreed, and stated that it all depended on their PDP phasing. At the time
of PDP, two points of access and level of service would be looked at. It would be
determined what roads would need to connect at that time.
Member Craig commented that we usually don't have an ODP that is out in the middle
of nowhere, with no east and west or north and south connections. It bothers her that
the off site improvements are not being required of them. Member Craig wondered why
the connections are not shown on the ODP.
Mr. McCallum replied that he did not have that answer, but he assumed they could.
Eric Bracke, Transportation Department stated that all the property owners and all the
folks out there really got together and tried to work towards an overall plan for almost
the entire square mile. This project and the Harmony Tech project really are separate
projects, but they are also very much tied together in coordinating. If you take a look at
the Harmony Tech Park ODP, all the connections have been made and you can see the
overall transportation system of collectors, connectors, re -circulation roads, and where
the signals are going to be. Even though there are several pieces, everyone has
worked very hard to make it work for everyone.
Member Craig was still concerned that with these connections are not shown on the
ODP, if all the other projects go away and this project starts building, would they still be
responsible for putting in the connections.
Mr. Bracke replied that yes, they would still be responsible for making the connections
just to meet the code. They would have to punch out Rock Creek to Ziegler Road and
Cambridge to Harmony.
Member Craig asked for demonstration of how this project is convenient to schools and
shopping.
. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 5
Planner Fuchs reviewed the slides of the site plan for the shopping and schools in the
area and the routes to those areas. He explained that the applicant does have the
ability to provide some convenience shopping within his development plan. He also
reviewed the existing and future parks in the area.
Chairperson Colton asked Planner Fuchs to review for the audience the exemption to
normal requirements for contiguity because this is in the Fossil Creek Planning Area.
Planner Fuchs replied that in order to help facilitate more urban development in the
Fossil Creek corridor, it was in agreement, with input from citizens of Fort Collins and
citizens within the area, to exempt them from having to comply with the 1/6 contiguity for
development. The 1/6 contiguity also applies to annexations within that area, which
means that 1/6 of the property boundary needs to be contiguous to existing urban
development.
Member Gavaldon moved for approval of the request for Alternative Compliance
for Section 3.6.3, Street Patterns and Connectivity Standards (c) and (d). That the
plan is equal to or better than the plan that complies with the Land Use Code.
0 Member Torgerson seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7-0.
Member Gavaldon moved approval of the Willowbrook Overall Development Plan,
#8-9513.
Member Torgerson seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7-0.
Project: Harmony Technology Park — Amended Overall
Development Plan, #12-97C
Project Description: Request to amend the Harmony Technology Park
Overall Development Plan consisting of a mixed -use
development of office and industrial park, commercial
uses, lodging, and high density residential on 267.18
acres. The site is located at the southeast corner of
Harmony Road and Ziegler Road. The property is
10 zoned HC, Harmony Corridor.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 6
Recommendation: Approval with Conditions
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Chairperson Colton and Member Gavaldon excused themselves from participating due
to a conflict of interest on this project.
Member Torgerson took over as Chairperson.
Ron Fuchs, City Planner gave the staff presentation on the project. He reviewed once
again the eight criteria that an Overall Development Plan should comply with for
approval. Planner Fuchs explained for the board the history of the project, the street
layout and street connections. He explained each request for alternative compliance in
several areas, and that staff recommended approval of those requests. He stated that
staff is in the process of meeting and talking with the applicant and evaluating potential
areas for pedestrian connection links across the ditch to eventually tie into the city's
master trail system on the east side of County Road 7.
Planner Fuchs explained that areas S and T were designated for stormwater detention
areas. He also explained the areas that are shown and referred to as secondary uses,
and other areas that are referred to as primary uses. He stated that the maximum
percentage of secondary uses would be 25% per the Harmony Corridor Plan, and that
there was a current Project Development Plan under review for a portion of the property
that would come before the Board as a Type II review.
Bruce Hendee, BHA Design gave the applicant presentation. He reviewed the original
Overall Development Plan that was approved in 1997. He explained the changes to
that plan and the expansion of the Overall Development Plan and the proposed uses.
Mr. Hendee discussed the stormwater detention on the site and how it would be
mitigated. The detention would be facilitated in the southeast corner of the site and
conveyed to the east to the Fossil Creek inlet ditch. Mr. Hendee reviewed the primary
and secondary proposed uses on the plan. He stated that they are working with Hewlett
Packard on a phasing plan, but it has not been completed as of today.
Mr. Hendee discussed access and the roadway system. He stated there is a proposed
signal at Cambridge and one at Technology Parkway. He stated that Technology
Parkway would be signalized and would be the main gateway for Technology Park.
Cambridge Drive would continue south into the Willowbrook Subdivision and ultimately
south to County Road 36. Cinquefoil is illustrated to extend from Harmony Road due
south connecting into Willowbrook, and it would be a right-in/right-out only. Mr. Hendee
also reviewed the east/west roadways and the locations of the access points.
• Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 7
Member Craig asked if one of the first phases that come in would be the phase with the
campus master plan included.
Mr. Hendee replied that it has not been determined yet, but the first phase would be
somewhere on the north part of the site.
Public Input
Laurel Cuban, 4708 Cambridge Avenue, stated her concerns. She stated that she and
her husband reside in the enclave portion of the site. She stated that she appreciated
Hewlett Packard's willingness to move Cambridge Drive onto their property so they
don't have to lose property to the new and improved road. However, they are still
concerned about the degree and the amount of traffic that will be going past their
residences there. She also noted for the Board's knowledge that if a proposed road
would go through between hers and her neighbor's properties, there would be 29
mature trees that would have to be removed. She felt that would be a great loss to that
community. She was also concerned about the water table in the area being high and
that any development or any irrigation that would occur in the area around them would
affect their home. She stated that they had concern about this type of development and
what affect it would have on their property values. She felt this amount of growth not
directly adjacent to the city was urban sprawl.
Public Input Closed
Member Torgerson asked Mr. Hendee to address the concern about the water table in
the area.
Mr. Hendee clarified that they are having geo-technical studies done in the area. The
water varies dramatically across the entire length of this site. He stated that they are in
the process of installing a monitoring well that would monitor the depth of the ground
water. He stated that they have already determined processes for detaining the water
and would not increase the water table. What they are looking at is a lined detention
pond that would detain the water and then release it into the storm drainage without
increasing the water table.
Mr. Hendee also addressed the comment about sprawl. He stated that this is a master
plan. It would not all be built out at once. What you are looking at here is 25 years
worth of growth. It is part of the Fossil Creek Area Plan that the city adopted years ago.
Member Craig asked for an overview of how they were going to solve their stormwater
. problems.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 8
Glen Schlueter, Stormwater Utility responded that the detention on the Hewlett Packard
site would be in the southeast corner of the site and would be conveyed, either through
a pipe or channel that would take the water directly into the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch. He
stated that the Stormwater Department is working with the Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch to
locate the points of discharge and to have an agreement with them so they are assured
that their ditch would handle the water.
Member Craig asked about treatment of the water before it goes into the inlet ditch.
Mr. Schlueter replied that the water would be treated in the detention ponds. All the
sites would have water quality extended detention in the detention ponds.
Member Craig asked what was happening between the detention pond to the inlet ditch.
Mr. Schlueter replied the water would be in either a pipe or a ditch. They have been
talking about a pipe. It would not be running down asphalt.
Member Craig asked about the high water table.
Mr. Schlueter replied that the city of Fort Collins does not have a groundwater utility.
The Engineering Department usually reviews those plans. The Building Department
does have some code requirements under the Building Code, which would require a
ground water test before a permit is issued. It is really up to the design engineer of the
development.
Member Craig asked if developments of this type affect the groundwater very much.
Mr. Schlueter replied it varies. He has seen it both ways. It really is unpredictable.
Mark Virata, Engineering Department added that typically what occurs in areas that you
may find high ground water, the soils report would recommend some sort of perimeter
drain system where a basement would be installed. The city would require an
underdrain analysis report. The report would look into the design that would be used to
convey any sub -drain piping, and if it was viewed as necessary for the development
project. It would also look at where the groundwater is at and how surrounding
properties may be affected by groundwater in the area.
Mr.Virata went on to say that there is criteria that the report is evaluated against, and in
situations where staff feels that a property may be installing a sub -drain system, we may
look at a perforated versus a non -perforated type of pipe system so it affects only the
property internal to the site, and a solid system that would prevent it from affecting the
properties surrounding or outside the development proposal.
0
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 9
Member Craig asked if a report for this area has been done.
Mr. Virata replied that no report would be required until a Project Development Plan is
submitted for review.
Member Craig asked about the 29 trees that would be removed for the proposed future
road.
Mr. Virata replied that with any project that has existing trees, there is a City Forester
that would have to be consulted. He would determine whether it would affect the design
of the roadway. If the City Forester determines that the trees were of value and should
not be removed, then an alternative design would have to be looked at.
Member Craig asked if the trees would be evaluated at the time that Cambridge is put in
to connect to Technology Parkway.
Mr. Virata replied that it would be looked at.
Richard Keller, 4808 Cambridge, commented to the Board that he did not believe there
. would be enough room between the two houses, even if the trees were taken out to put
a road in.
Eric Bracke, Transportation Department replied that the connection would not be made
until someone acquired the properties and have proposed another use on it. The City
would not go in and condemn the houses. It would be when there would be a willing
seller. If the property owners decided to stay there forever, the connection would not be
made and we would keep the temporary connection to the north.
Member Bernth moved for approval of the proposed Alternative Compliance as
found in paragraph two of the Findings of Fact of the Staff Report, Section 3.6.3,
Street Pattern and Connectivity Standards (C) and (D) is equal to or better than a
plan which complies with the Land Use Code.
Member Carpenter seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0.
Member Bernth moved for approval of the Harmony Technology Park Overall
Development Plan. With a note that all the vehicular and non -vehicular movement
corridors and paths be evaluated upon subsequent Project Development Plans
within the Harmony Technology Park ODP, including connectivity through the
site, east (across Fossil Creek Inlet Ditch), west, south, and north.
9 Member Carpenter seconded the motion. The motion was approved 5-0.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 10
Project: Recommendation to City Council on the Mason Street
Transportation Corridor Master Plan
Project Description: Recommendation to City Council regarding the
Mason Street Transportation Corridor Master Plan
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Chairperson Colton did not return to the meeting and Member Carpenter also left due to
illness. Member Gavaldon took over the meeting as Chairperson.
Susanne Durkin -Schindler, Transportation Department gave the staff presentation along
with Ray Moe, Consultant on the project.
Mr. Moe gave a simulation of what the Corridor Concept Plan is going to look like. He
stated that the key idea was to provide a transit and bike/ped facility between the north
end of town and south of Harmony. Mr. Moe summarized the capital costs, funding,
and the cost of yearly maintenance of the project. He also reviewed implementation of
the project.
Member Craig asked when construction may begin.
Ms. Durkin -Schindler replied that the city would be issuing an RFP hopefully yet this
year in order to gain consultants who will be doing the final design. If that moves
smoothly, then construction may begin 2002.
Member Bernth moved to recommend approval to City Council regarding the
Mason Street Transportation Corridor Master Plan including the extension from
Harmony to Fossil Creek and the Memorandum of Understanding with Burlington
Northern Railroad.
Member Craig seconded the motion.
Member Gavaldon commented that being on the team for 18 months, he felt that a good
job was done with this project and felt the leadership of Susanne and Ray was
excellent.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
September 21, 2000
Page 11
Member Meyer stated she would support the idea but has some concerns about the
costs. She felt that something needed to be done, and maybe this is not the answer.
She did not feel that buses are the answer, and felt that light rail may be more of what
we need.
Ms. Durkin -Schindler replied that by putting the transit way in as shown on the Master
Plan, when the community is large enough to support light rail, it can go right in the
same transit way.
Member Torgerson commented that he has never been so excited about a city project
as this one. He commended the staff on the job they did on the public outreach. He
can't wait to see it come on-line.
Member Craig agreed. She also commended the staff on the job they did on a project
of this magnitude.
The motion was approved 5-0.
There was no other business.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
E