Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 06/06/1994 (2)PLANNING i ZONING BOARD MEETING MINUTES June 6, 1994 Gerry Horak, Council Liaison Ron Phillips, Staff support Liaison The June 6, 1994, meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board was called to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall West, 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present included Vice -Chair Jan Cottier, Members Jennifer Fontane, James Klataske, and Bernie Strom, Lloyd Walker and Sharon Winfree. Chair Rene' Clements was absent. Staff members present included Interim Planning Director Ron Phillips, Deputy City Attorney Paul Eckman, Joe Frank, Basil Hamdan, Mike Herzig, Steve Olt, Ted Shepard, Tom Vosburg, Kirsten Whetstone, and Carolyn Worden. AGENDA REVIEW Mr. Ron Phillips, Interim Planning Director read the agenda review items. Consent Agenda: Item 1. 5 Senses Daycare PUD - Preliminary and Final, #23-94, Item 2. Resolution PZ94-7 Easement Vacation. Discussion Agenda: Item 3. Harmony Market PUD, 6th Filing, Red Robin - Final, #54-87T, Item 4. Amendment to the Harmony Corridor Plan and Land Development Guidance System, #29- 90A, Item 5. Falcon Ridge PUD - Preliminary, #2-94F; Item 6. Indian Hills Village PUD - Final, #81-93A and Item 7. Fossil Creek Estates PUD - Final (continued at the request of the applicant). CONSENT AGENDA Item 1. 5 Senses Daycare PUD - Preliminary and Final, #23-94 and Item 2. Resolution PZ94-Easement Vacation. Member Klataske made the motion to accept Items 1 and 2 of the Consent Agenda. Member Winfree seconded the motion. Motion passed 6-0. Item 3. Harmony Market PUD, 6th Filing, Red Robin - Final. Mr. Ted Shepard, Project Planner, read the staff report and recommendations. The conditions of approval have been satisfied and staff recommends approval of the PUD. There were slides presented. 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 2 There was discussion among Board Members and Staff with regard to brick color compatibility, and landscaping methods. These items were approved by staff. Craig Cohen, 7555 E. Hampden Ave., Denver, CS Architects, reported that the neon was taken off the building. They would be using all brick veneer to match the existing shopping center. No citizen participation. Member Strom moved approval of the Harmony Market PUD, 6th Filing, Red Robin, Final, i54-87T. Member Pontane seconded the motion. Vice -Chair Cottier said that the Plan was an improvement and there was something good accomplished by postponing the final at the last meeting. The appearance would fit in better at the center. Motion carried 6-0. Mr. Joe Frank, Assistant Planning Director, gave the staff report stating that since the last P&Z meeting on May 23, the staff has had an opportunity to review the comments of the Board and meet with the public. They have spent time discussing the changes and how those would be implemented through the LDGS. The product of this analysis is a revised ordinance that staff believes would be more effective and would address the concerns expressed at the May 23 Board meeting. Mr. Frank also stated in response to the Board suggestion for a 60- day review period, the planning staff has begun arrangements for holding two informal meetings in the next 60 days to assess interest in making changes to land use policies contained in the Harmony Corridor Plan. An initial meeting is currently being scheduled with the original Harmony Corridor Steering Committee. A follow-up meeting will be held within the next 60 days including other parties, comprising neighborhood organizations, property owners and other interested groups. The objectives of this citizen participation process would be to prepare a list of concerns and issues with regard to future land uses in the corridor. This list will compiled with a report and presented to the City Council for their direction on how to proceed. This report clarifies Policy LU-5, the Harmony Corridor Plan, the future regional shopping centers along Harmony Road (to be located along two arterial Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 3 streets). In the Harmony Corridor, two arterial streets include, College Avenue, JFK Parkway, when extended, Lemay Avenue, Timberline Road and County Road 9. It would also eliminate some ambiguous wording in Policy LU-4, which states that 11 ..all retail and commercial development shall be located in shopping centers." Staff believes that restricting the location of community regional shopping centers to corners of two arterial streets is consistent with the goal of the Harmony Corridor Plan to discourage strip commercial development. Other interpretations that expand the number of shopping centers is not consistent with this goal. Mr. Frank stated that the second purpose is to clarify the right of the City to establish locational and land use standards for the purpose of implementing and interpreting the provisions of the LDGS. Staff believes that although the City already has the right to do this, staff believes it would be preferable and clearer if this right was established in the LDGS. Mr. Frank said the third part of the ordinance establishes LU-4 and LU-5, as mandatory locational standards in the implementation of the LDGS in regard to properties in the Harmony Corridor. This . change elevates the policies from simply being advisory to being mandatory. The fourth point of the ordinance is that staff believes there is an inconsistency in the criteria of the community regional shopping center land use category in the LDGS with the proposed amendment LU-5, or specifically Criterion B of the Land Use Category of the LDGS could be interpreted to encourage the location of Community/ Regional Shopping Centers at collector/arterials street intersections which would be in conflict with LU-5. The proposed amendment deletes the references that it is to be located at collector/arterial intersections. The Planning and Zoning Board and the City staff have received many letters in regard to the proposed amendment. The positions expressed in these letters and phone calls have been varied. There has been considerable agreement that the intent of the Harmony Corridor Plan to prevent Harmony Road from turning into another College Avenue or Mulberry Street was a good one and should be implemented. There were a number of suggestions as to how this was to be accomplished, for example, allowing development only in certain areas and restricting further commercial development along the corridor. Mr. Frank said the discussions raised more issues than are being resolved by the draft ordinance. There is, however, a real sense of urgency of having a clear definition of location of Community/ Regional Shopping Centers along Harmony Road. The staff agrees Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 4 there are other issues that need to be resolved, these issues will be addressed in their own time and according to their own process. He described an issue that not only impacts how the Harmony Corridor Develops, but how the rest of the community develops and that is the subject of "big box" retailers. In the next six months staff will be reviewing and developing land use policies and design criteria for this new retail use in our community. In the next IS to 24 months, the City will be going through an extensive citizen participation process to update the City's Comprehensive Plan which will include looking at the City's goals, objective and policies for commercial development throughout the community. The reason these are mentioned is that the ordinance recommended tonight is not seen by staff as a panacea for all the issues or concerns. However, the adoption of the Ordinance is an important and needed step; for this reason staff is recommending that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend to the City Council it be adopted. The City Council will consider on June 7, 1994. Vice -Chair Cottier asked Mr. Eckman a procedural question. Since this was voted on at the last meeting, does the Board have to vote to reconsider this item or is it a different item? Mr. Eckman said it was a different item, although it is the same topic. Member Strom asked if staffs main concern was strip commercial and that Harmony Corridor not become a solid commercial strip? Is the intent of the ordinance aimed at that issue? Mr. Frank said the plan's two major goals in terms of commercial. development are to prevent urban sprawl and maintain opportunities for major employers to develop in the corridor. The intent is to clarify existing policy that deals with major high intensity land uses, define what the term means and what major street intersections are. The intent is to discourage strip commercial development on Harmony Road but also to maintain opportunities for major employment uses like the ones that have occurred (NCR, Hewlett-Packard). Member Strom commented that the intent of the Board two weeks ago was clear to have neighborhood -developer interaction with the staff for 60 days before amendments to the ordinances were considered. By specifying that we are talking about arterial streets, that major community/regional shopping centers be located on Harmony to be at intersections at arterial streets, he was trying to reconcile that with what was in the LDGS for Community/Regional Shopping Review, which basically says they are given extra credit for not taking their access off arterial streets. • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 5 Mr. Frank said he didn't think there was a conflict in allowing Community/Regional Shopping Centers to be at the corner of two arterials and having access off .of non -arterials. One is transportation related in terms of discouraging direct access off of arterials. It would work as it has in other areas in the community. Member Strom said there will be a different kind of problem in terms of traffic with the proposed configuration of traffic interaction. He pointed out why he felt there needed to be more discussion with regard to this topic before enacting changes, to have the kinds of discussions that brings out these nuances and issues before we make the changes rather than afterward. Member Walker also discussed Harmony Market and asked if it would meet the existing criteria and would that prove the point or disprove the point of the ordinance change? Mr. Frank said that it does demonstrate the point that it is at the intersection of two arterials and still have primary access off a • non -arterial street. Primary access would be off of oakridge Drive and Boardwalk Drive which are both collector streets. Member Walker pointed out that the size of the centers can be so large that, in fact, does impact a collector street. Mr. Frank said that the plan is not clear in terms of discouraging strip commercial along the Harmony Corridor. Concern now would be to control development. There are other issues as well that will be addressed further. Mr. Ron Phillips said that another point that is ancillary to what Mr. Frank brought out is that there are probably more types of collectors streets and in the future this could be more clearly defined: residential, commercial and perhaps a combination of these two. The staff's recommendation is to go ahead and fix the things that can be fixed now that do not change the intent of the Plan. Those things that take more time will be fixed as the plan is processed. Vice -Chair Cottier asked if there was notification to the Golden Meadows Group that was formed in response to this issue, or of developers that this would be discussed this evening. Mr. Frank said a letter was sent last week to property owners at signalized intersections along Harmony Corridor, the involved • neighborhood organizations, former Harmony Corridor Steering Committee, another Harmony Corridor mailing list. He said staff Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 6 met last Wednesday night with the newly formed Harmony Neighborhood Organization to discuss, not only this plan and changes but other issues that affect their neighborhood. Member Walker asked if this is a refinement in staff's thinking of what was debated two weeks ago and superseding them? Mr. Frank said they are refinements and Planning staff and the Attorney's office discussed implementation. The changes in LU-5 and the changes which establish the policies as standards are the new parts. The King Sooper's proposal is considered a "neighborhood shopping center" and remains unaffected. Member Strom asked why the term "compact" commercial shopping centers was not being discussed? Mr. Eckman said that term was not clear enough to keep in the language and did not have a good definition for "compact". Staff decided to delete it and regulate the design of a shopping centers through the LDGS. All shopping centers under the LDGS will be seeking conservation of space and staff didn't feel it needed to be stated, especially with respect to Section 3, where a standard is being developed and trying to eliminating ambiguities in the standards. CITIZEN INPUT. David Everitt - 2413 Brookwood - Everitt Companies - He stated that part of the reason people may not be present tonight is that it was understood that there would be 60 days to interact to think it through for the code. He thought this proposal tonight circumvented that decision of the Board two weeks ago. If there are traffic or other issues involved, there is a process in place to evaluate the projects impacts on traffic and neighborhoods. Specifying certain land uses at certain intersections "carte blanc" would be circumventing the process and not allow us to evaluate each project as it comes in. It, therefore, handcuffs the City and its Planning Board firm evaluating the merits of these projects on their own. Mr. Everitt had a question as to the definition of "commercial" as it relates to LU-4. Much of the land that has been purchased along the corridor by different users and developers have been purchased under the assumptions that policies and procedures.and guidelines in place are valid and to radically deviate from that, could affect the value of the land and some uses that are currently being projected. Another question was related to Section 2, amending the code of the City where the City shall have the right to establish general, locational and land use standards. When does this apply • . Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 7 city-wide? When implemented, does this not circumvent the system already in place apart from the LDGS to establish locational and land use criteria? If the language is implemented into the City Code, how would that be processed? He asked about Section 3 "commercial development to be located in shopping centers", does that refer to regional, and neighborhood shopping centers? Would that preclude stand alone retail or commercial uses such as convenient stores, etc.? What about encouraging walking and biking to shopping centers? Mr. Wayne Schrader - Asked about notification guidelines for an issue of this magnitude. He said his letter was post -marked June 1 and received it on Friday, June 3. He spoke to a number of people on Friday that would be directly affected. They had not received their notification. He felt it was short notification. He encouraged more time to study it more fully. He asked about smaller commercial parcels that are not on Harmony, what will happen to this type of land use? Mr. Bill Elliott - resident of Golden Meadows and works at Comlinear in the Oakridge Business Park. He believed the intent of • the Harmony Corridor Plan was clear. He read the purpose which was to explore "how to attract businesses and industries that will provide a strong economic base and be compatible with community values. The plan focuses on a land use pattern of urban design that protects community values." Lost in discussion is the importance of the transportation link of Harmony in the community. He believed the proposal would change the influx of traffic from other areas of town on other streets and felt it wasn't the objective of the plan. He talked about some of the existing businesses that are models for the corridor's future. The point of the plan is to limit strip/commercial and encourage employers to locate. Mr. Tim Dolan - 4212 New Hampdon Court - He reported the neighborhood would be present at the Council Meeting tomorrow in force. It is in support of this revision with a "proviso". He said it isn't worded as strongly as it needs to be. There is question about the appropriateness of amount and type of retail development along Harmony Road and will not affect his neighborhood concerns for King Soopers development. Larry Stroud - Generally in support of the Harmony Corridor Plan. There are some concerns with regard not to intent, but to language. There is a "big box" concern on Harmony Road. He appealed to the Board to not sacrifice the smaller user and smaller intersections in trying to immediately solve a community concern with the "big box" retailers. There are some specific retail plans that may not be able to be developed because of the wording. He requested more work be put into language. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 8 Bill Vos - 2024 E. Harmony Road - Owner of the Harmony filling station - He said if the proposal went through, it would definitely help him financially. However, he was not in favor of it because any development would have to have access and easement roads required and will be coming out on Harmony and felt it was a mute point. Les Kaplin - 1067 Sailor's Reef - His concern was that the ordinance was not comprehensive enough which might foreclose on more creative solutions in the future. More forethought and input from the community needs to be made. He felt the 60-day period would provide that time needed. He felt this approach to change was inappropriate. He suggested defining the problem with all broader community members and limitations, ramifications, etc. Dan Eckles - The PUD process, to his understanding, was to fill in property, allowing flexibility and design to give people the opportunity to bring forth their own ideas of what could be used on the properties, creating the highest and best use of properties throughout the community. Blanket legislation for this kind of property would create a lot of restrictions and cause properties to never develop. CITIZEN INPUT CLOSED. Vice -Chair Cottier asked staff to answer questions of citizens. Is this just intent for the Harmony Corridor or city-wide? What is the process of establishing locational and land use standards? If all retail and commercial are to be in shopping centers, does that preclude stand-alone commercial? How does that affect accessibility to the neighborhood? What happens to small commercial parcels that are left not at the intersections of two arterials (what use is appropriate for them)? Mr. Frank said defining what is retail is simple but for commercial it is more complicated. The C-Commercial Zone in the Zoning Ordinance has a wide open list of uses and includes uses that are not intended to be in the Harmony Corridor. There are pros and cons of letting the definition of land uses come about as they are applied for. There has been an attempt to redefine "commercial" as auto related and road side commercial, plus retail stores, convenience stores, grocery stores, equipment rental, personal service shops, hotels/motels, standard restaurants, indoor theaters, indoor theaters, recreation uses, and similar uses could be set as determined by the Planning and Zoning. Mr. Frank stated in terms of Section 2, the City having the right to establish general locational and design standards, the intent is to allow the City, in the future, to establish land use standards Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 9 for any part of the City, if they felt it was necessary. However, as each policy is adopted, it would be determined to applied to a specific area or a community -wide. In Section 3, it is specific for properties in the Harmony Corridor. The adoption process would remain as is. Any future standards will be adopted by ordinance. Vice -Chair Cottier asked if the statement that "all commercial and retail be located in shopping centers" precludes stand-alone and what does that leave for the small commercial parcels that exist now? Mr. Frank said that each individual project will be considered on its own merits. The way it is written now and what the policies of the plan say is that "commercial uses shall be in compact shopping centers." It raises an issue that there is an intent, although it is not mentioned in the policy statements elsewhere, that there be free-standing uses. It makes sense to have accessory uses to employment centers. This will need to be looked into in the next 60 days. Under this ordinance, there is still opportunity for other kinds of shopping to occur along Harmony Road, for example, neighborhood shopping centers, one neighborhood convenience, also light industrial, residential, or office, etc. It makes it Is difficult for free-standing retail with the current wording. Member Fontane said that community the Board is looking at changing the existing policies because values are changing. The value of property is affected by these changes. It is a good move because it reflects what we as a community feel is important, if we use old policies to lay the land out, the value may not be measured correctly rather than a revised policy. She did not see it as circumventing the current system and it is an important part of the continuing modification of updating our Plan. This is just one piece and there needs to be more round table discussion. The citizen input two weeks ago was in favor of stronger guidelines in this area. Member Walker stated that he wasn't at the meeting two weeks ago, and he felt that the Board was making a recommendation to the City Council with refined ideas of two weeks ago. There will be more discussion tomorrow at the City Council meeting. He believed that the Harmony Corridor document presents a vision, somewhere employers can locate rather than strip -commercial, it is time to revise working documents and supports the notion of change. He reflected that there was more work to be done. He thought it was good to define with new wording and was in agreement supporting the changes. He felt it was appropriate to have the 60-day public input to review this. 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 10 Member Strom said he thought the Board discussed two weeks ago that, an important piece of the process of change has to do with people on different sides of the issue sitting down at a table and talking back and forth to each other. Recognizing through that process that whenever there are changes to land use regulations, or planning issues, transportation, air quality, alternative modes of transportation, etc., they are all entwined. The best product is arrived at, for the future of our community, through sitting down at the table, hammering out these ideas, disagreeing with each other, arguing with respect to fine details before it is written into ordinance. He believed it was missing in this proposal. The notice seemed late, there were some meetings, but not the round- table format. He believed that he could not support the changes at this time without the roundtable discussions. Member Klataske supported the ideas expressed why Member Strom. He stated there were some good changes that have come about in two weeks, there will be even more in the next 45 days, but to push this revised ordinance as a "stop -gap measure" is not what the intent was of the Board to have 60-days review with the community. Member Winfree said she waited to hear comments from the Board members who were present on May 23, she was somewhat confused about the issue because the 60-days was to provide opportunity for public process. She was not ready to support the changes proposed to City Council. Vice -Chair Cottier said that the language proposed have problems with clarity and definition that need to be ironed out, she had concern with what the implications were to small parcels that are left. She said she reviewed all of the old documents (1990 and 1991) of the Harmony Corridor Plan and she said the intent of the Plan originally had policy statements that limited retail and commercial development east of Timberline, the neighbors were in favor but it later got dropped from the plan. Later comments showed favor of the restrictions on commercial and retail development. If that wording was in there, we wouldn't be faced with the problems we are seeing and we would clearly not have the hypothetical 15 shopping center being able to exist east of Timberline. What she saw as the original intent was not to limit to two major arterials, she did not find that in earlier documents. If there is concern about strip -commercial developing as on College, it would be much easier to establish distance restrictions between shopping centers, rather than saying they have to be at two arterials. She felt it inappropriate to apply the changes on Harmony Corridor to the entire city, as in changing the point chart of the LDGS. . Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 11 0 Member Strom moved to reaffirm the Boardls position made two weeks ago. Member Winfree seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-1, with Fontane voting in the negative. Item 5 Falcon Ridge Pup - Preliminary. !2 94F Member Sharon Winfree had a conflict of interest and was not present during the hearing. Mr. Steve Olt, Project Planner, read the staff report with the requested variance to solar orientation ordinance. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Peter Sherman and Mr. Ed Lawler of Sandcreek Associates, presented aerial slides of the area to show why it is compatible with the surrounding area and why it provides a good transition from College Avenue to Highway 1 into the County and larger acreage areas. There are a half dozen houses on Ford Lane and one lot is vacant. Rimrock is a 10-acre parcel with a density of 3.1 acres, which is almost exactly the same density they are proposing for the development directly across the street. He showed a slide from the south where Ford Lane was located. The mobile home park, Valley View Avenue have a similar density to their development. another slide showed Spaulding Lane, Highway 1 and College Avenue. There has been some concern about a traffic bottleneck at Spaulding Lane and Highway 1. There is a stop light at Highway 1 and Highway 287. There is a rather short neck between the Highway 1 and Spaulding Lane. It is the applicant's understanding that there is a project slated to re-route Highway 1 farther around the west down 287. The neck that is connecting Highway 287 and Spaulding will be abandoned and Spaulding Lane will go up Highway 1 and intersect the new section of Highway 1 which should relieve a great deal of the traffic congestion that results at that intersection at this time. There is a fairly sizable mobile home park on the west of Highway 287, transitioning from a higher density mobile home, standard 3 plus units to the acre, then out into the country. We feel we have a compatible project and that it provides a good transition. We will be glad to entertain any questions. CITIZEN INPUT. Ingrid Simpson - resides in the Northeast area of Fort Collins - She represented the Northeast Neighborhood Coalition. This area is within the larger area that is in the process of being studied. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 12 The Coalition has submitted a petition to City Council to h ave an interim look at the existing inter -governmental agreement, which is overdue for review. This project, Falcon Ridge, is a critical example of a study that needs to be done before major developments are allowed to occur. The documents that will be sent to City Council were given to the Planning and Zoning Board and it has already been given to the County. The project needs to be downsized similar to the Pheasant Ridge Subdivision which is already annexed. Rather than using the issue that these will be compatible with the existing Rimrock Subdivision, this does not allow, in its present form, a transition area and does not appear to be in the spirit of the original governmental agreement as it was drafted between the City and the County. It is time to address this "leap -frog" development concept. Just because the Land Development Guidance System (LDGS) promotes this type of density, it should not mean it is always adaptable to all areas, especially this area north of the major city development, which is all appearing in the south. The Northeast has already developed some unique characteristics. Some of the areas are 30 plus years old. Even though the densities appear adequate at a first glance, a closer look will show that this project will actually cause a major impact on the existing area, especially in view of the already overloaded access on Terry Lake Road, Country Club Road and Lemay. We need to slow down and examine, just as we are doing with the Harmony Corridor, what really is in the best interest of the established neighborhoods, rather than apply the same criteria as is used in the much dense uses further south. This area is unique, having been developed for so long. There are large tracts of land that have opened up in the south for development. That is not available in the north, there are pockets as was shown on the map. It is one of the more critical areas to be carefully studied. Just because there may be, down the road, a promise of a by-pass or a change in the traffic flow, it is totally going to depend on how much money is available from the State. If any of you have worked on the express way or by-pass projects, historically, a piece of it is done and money runs out. If the project is passed in its existing form, this project is just going to be a nightmare for the people that live there and also for those people who have purchased their homes. Mr. Jerry Manning - resident of the Rimrock Subdivision - he is a member of the Northeast Neighborhood Coalition. He addressed the traffic and safety issues as they relate to the planned Falcon • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 13 Ridge Development as they impact families on Ford Lane. His concern was the traffic that moves east and north out of the subdivision onto Country Club Road. A direct access from the Falcon Ridge to Country Club Road is desired by the current residents there; and talking to the developers, he believed that was their original plan as well. The advantages would be to maintain the integrity and independence of the Rimrock Subdivision, would also reduce safety and environmental hazards to the established neighborhood residents, and would be a cost savings to the developer not to have to upgrade the County Road to City standards. Another point of issue is with the traffic impact study prepared by Eugene Capola for Sandcreek Associates. Some of the critical statistical data is incorrect. Some of the assumptions and estimates pertaining to traffic direction and growth are questionable at best. These errors would invalidate any conclusions made form that report. Mr. Manning said that Ford Lane was estimated at 100 vehicles per day, on page 3, and would like to have the resource named --where those kinds of estimates come from. The report also states that it is under stop sign control and it is not, nor are there 100 . vehicles using that street each day. In fact, using the report's own trip generation of 9.5 trips per home per day times the five existing homes on Ford Lane would equal 47.5 trips per day, not the 100 trips stated in their report. There is much less traffic. he lives at the end of Ford Lane and, besides the traffic he generates from his house, only a few cars may come his way by mistake. he calculated only 28.85 vehicles per day. By the reports of higher use of traffic on Ford Lane, the data indicates a much lower impact on the development, when in reality, it would have a tremendous impact, in fact, an additional 300-350 trips per day. Using a high estimate of 50 vehicles per day, currently on Ford Lane, would mean a 500 percent increase in traffic on Ford Lane alone. He could not live with that, nor could his family. Mr. Manning took another exception to the traffic report. It was estimated another 10 percent increase in traffic on Country Club Road and Spaulding Lane between now and 1997. He wanted the source of the findings as well. The Falcon Ridge development alone will add nearly 300 vehicle trips per day on each of the roads, based on their data that 583 trips will be generated from the 60 homes on that proposed development and half of those trips would be going on each of those roads daily, according to their report. The increase on Spaulding Lane, which they designate now at 500 vehicles per day, would go up to almost 800 vehicle trips per day, or a 60 percent increase. On Country Club Road, the current estimate is 2,000 per day and another 200 would bring it up to a 15 percent • increase. These increases are without adding any other new development sin the area over the next few years. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 14 Mr. Manning concluded by asking that, with these discrepancies noted, he requested the City put a hold on this development until a new unbiased study is prepared and submitted for review. he said he would appreciate an opportunity to respond if there were questions of the City Traffic Department about the numbers he reported. Sharon Housely - 2105 Sunstone Drive - She read from a prepared statement. On Wednesday, December 15, 1993, the Sandcreek Associates presented a proposal for the Falcon Ridge Subdivision at a Neighborhood Informational meeting. At that meeting, the developers wrote down many, many questions and told the group they would find out the answers to those questions and have a second informational meeting. Two major concerns she addressed were: 1. Would ELCO Water District be able to provide enough water for the 60 proposed homes without affecting water pressure of existing residences? 2. Can Tavelli Elementary, whose enrollment is already 625 students, handle the enrollment from these additional homes. Ms. Houseley said she would like to go on record that the neighborhood had not received any answers to their questions and would still like to have a response by the developers. Mr. Tim Carney - 2101 Sandstone Drive - Rimrock Subdivision - He has written a letter to the Board regarding his thoughts about Falcon Ridge. He stated it is the toughest development to get clear answers on because of the nature of the inter -governmental agreement, the access to the highway and the improvements to the roads. He has been referred to the City, County and the State and no one is really answering his questions. He said he could use the same slide to disprove the buffer area the developers showed a transition. He could take the same slide and take the opposite approach. he further stated if the area is known there is a geologic terrace, there are irrigation ditches, there are lakes. It is a world away and the density of the surrounding area, including Rimrock, including everything else around, it is no where near the proposed density of this development. His main concern about his, as stated in his letter are. 1. The density is too high. 2. The proposed access is inadequate and unfair to the existing residents. 3. There is a significant lack of infrastructure to support growth in this corridor and 4. Public safety would be negatively impacted, children going to school, roller bladers, etc. • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 15 Mr. Carney brought out a point on highway access. he had spoken to George Rowe who is the Regional Design Engineer at the State of Colorado Department of Engineering for the Highway 1 project. According to Mr. Rowe, the realignment of Highway 1 is still in the preliminary stages, it is not a "done deal". It is proposed to go to bid sometime in the next year. There is no inclusion for pedestrian access to the North College Business Corridor as yet in the preliminary access plan. If there is an increase in people, they need to safely access the North College Corridor, otherwise, the Country Club Road will be utilized, which is already an unsafe situation. Mr. Carney said he would like to see this development access Country Club Road directly. According to Mr. Rowe, the Department of Transportation, a 30 mph design speed requires a 200-foot stopping site distance. If they have the same block density as in Rimrock, oriented north -south, there is 230 feet between the street (60-foot street), that would provide the subdivision to directly access Country Club Road. He pointed to the location on the map and stated that stopping site distance to the east is significantly • less, provides 500 feet to Highway 1 and provides over 200 feet site stopping distance in both directions. He did not know why the developer couldn't take an access to Highway 1 or Spaulding Lane that would allow 500 feet, and 400 feet is required for 50 mph design speed. Ms. Genion Hammond - 505 County Club Road - She stated that she has been a resident of Rimrock over 20 years and chose to live in the County because of the animals and the beauty it offers. She realizes there will be change and as she understands that Ford Lane is half owned by the County and half owned by the City in length, two entities caring for the road or not. She challenged the Board as to the maintenance and upkeep of the road and she asked about the environmental impacts. She mentioned at Highway 1 you may wait through three light exchanges before a person could get across because of the traffic concentration. Mr. Ray Archer - 423 Spaulding Lane - His home is located at the southeast corner of the proposed development. his family selected the area because of its openness and its proximity to the city. He questioned the density of the proposed development compared to surrounding areas, where most live on acreages. He believed 60 units was too dense for the area. his major concern is for the children. He reported that the developer projected 51 children for the 60 homes site (27 elementary, 13 junior high and li high school students). After reviewing the homes in the $110,000 to $140,000 • range, 3-bedroom with unfinished basement, he concluded that it was more like a family dwelling, meaning 1 1/2 to 2 children per dwelling, meaning 90-120 children. He commented that the developers said there was good access to the park and to the Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 16 schools. If you look at the way it is presently, none of the connecting streets have sidewalks, curbs or gutters. He showed that the only way to get to the parks would be to go down Country Club and then south on Lemay to the park, which is across an irrigation ditch. He offered an idea of a centrally located park for the proposed development, or playground, or reduce the density to 30, stating the existing plan shows some lots to 6,000 square feet. His concern was for the children. Ed Powers - represents a family that owns property to the west of the development - The Spaulding property is between the development and his client's property. he showed the location on the map. The property has been owned by the family for generations, 70 years, and have lived there. At the time of annexation, there were several things requested and he did not see them happening in this development plan. He said he appreciated the staff providing the necessary information regarding the development. Mr. Powers said (1) when the information plat was reviewed, there was some information from old family records that not all of the owners had participated in the election of this annexation. He said he would bring it up later. (2) When the legal description was reviewed, they found it to be inaccurate, the legal description did not close and that several of the courses did not match up. In particular, the first course which produces contiguity with the City at this point that ran more northwesterly and away from the City limit line. This was brought to the Planning Staff's attention, they were notified prior to consideration by the Council for this annexation. Unfortunately, nothing has been done regarding those legal descriptions. Further problems have occurred as we have reviewed the legal descriptions and how it related to our property and how things interacted in the area. Mr. Powers stated when he came before the Board during the annexation process, he asked that this be a quality development, of an urban time and that is not seen in the development plans proposed. We don't see the urban standard being achieved. Perhaps we don't understand the preliminary plat process. It does not show everything. It just shows partial sidewalks only at the entry of the subdivision, and there are no street lights to provide illumination and security to the residents. As far as the ownership that he alluded to that not all of the owners participated in the election of the annexation. It had come to our attention that the proposed detention pond area, which is along Highway l and immediately west of the proposed subdivision, near Terry Lake Road and across Terry Lake itself, is not owned by the developer. . Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 17 Mr. Powers presented some documents to enter into evidence at this hearing. He would like to claim that he was representing the neighborhood. Vice -Chair Cottier said that the 30-minute time limit is for organized neighborhood presentations. Mr. Powers said he believed he provided sufficient copies to the Planning and Zoning Board and the staff of a resolution and series of quit -claim deeds. This is recorded at the County and what it represents is the first two quit -claim deeds on pages 2 and 3. Quit -Claim the property I pointed out previously between and enter a common ownership between the County and the Larimer-Weld Irrigation Company. They in turn hold the property in common. Mr. Powers said the other two quit -claim deeds which begin on page 4 and 5, quit -claim that land to the Ford family and Powers' family. He brought to the Board's attention on page 4, the bold letters on the first quit -claim deed on page 4, it says that the property that he has pointed out to the Board, is for the use and occupancy for agricultural and farming purposes. This does not . appear to be to us an agricultural or farming purpose. It is definitely an urban purpose to put a detention pond there. Legally, the detention pond belongs on the developer's property, not on the County's and irrigation company's property, if that is the case. The result of this is that it reduces the developers acreage without that by 1.46 acres, the density goes to 3.29 units per acre for the 18.24 acres that remain in the development without the area I outlined as the triangular area. Besides the concerns regarding ownership, there is also concern about the drainage and who will maintain it. We see that there will be a homeowner's association developed; we would like to have further established with sufficient capital to maintain. We also would expect to be able to expect and improve any drainage improvements on the triangular area as well, sine we do have an interest in this area. We don't doubt that the drainage can go through that area, but at historic rates, and we do want to have the assurance that we have the ability to inspect and approve the drainage improvements which will flow over an ownership interest that we hold. We also expect that the developer will improve the drainage along Highway 1, Terry Lake.Road to its ultimate point of discharge at the Larimer-Weld Canal. That would mean improvement along the highway -barrow ditch. That concluded his comments. Clifford Hart - 609 Cordial Road - He agreed with what other neighbors had said and that he lives on the north side of Country Club Road, where the lots are considerably larger and most are acreages, as are some of the properties to the south. he addressed Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 18 density being too high and found it difficult to understand how the project would be a buffer between larger properties and larger properties. The printed information that he had seen is somewhat misleading in regard to the wonderful site this is for this type of development, such as a park within 3,000 feet, only if you swim the Eaton Ditch or allow your kids to do so. Major employers were supposed to be within 3,000 feet, again only if you swim the Eaton Ditch or take Lemay or College Avenue. He was confused by the process as they were not allowed to discuss density at the annexation hearing and now er are basically being told that we are fortunate that they haven't passed 5 units per acre minimum and that we are lucky that we are only getting 3 units per acre. He did not understand at what point the density gets to be discussed. In regard to lot size, he said, if you look at the lots they are in the 7,000 - 7,500 square foot category. The developer's claim to fame is 10,000 square foot average. I can develop 6 lots, 5 at 2,000 and 1 at 100,000 and collect 18,300 square foot average. The figures can be somewhat misleading. One other number that was confusing was that the solar variance is based on 32 of 58 lots to come up with a percentage. According to the staff report earlier, he didn't understand the difference between 58 and 60. Carl Spaulding - owner of the property bordering on the west side. he had big problems with where the road tends to dump on his property. He showed the location of his home facing south. The access on Spaulding lane notes that there are problems on its access to Highway 1. There can't be Valley View, Spaulding Lane, trailer people to go up and out (he was pointing to the map). He said he was not contacted and asked planning staff to communicate with him. Don Mussard - 2124 Ford Lane - he said it was across the road and part of the access to the proposed development. The proposal by the developers is strong on defending objections raised in the past, but nothing was proposed but simply defended questions that had been raised. The point that this very nicely fits and buffers between urban and rural and suburban developments that have been there for many years. He contended that "piece -meal" development, one small area at a time, is self-perpetuating in that one is the buffer for the next one and the next one, etc. He was not sold on this idea. He requested the area map. The number of feet to a neighborhood playground is there to here. There is no street to connect the neighborhood easily or the alternative is a congested street or Country Club Road to Lemay, none of which have berms nor sidewalks. We are told that someday they will be provided for us. It doesn't help the kids that have to cross other people's property in order to get to school. They are close enough so they can't ride the bus, they can't get to the park, it is misleading to say it is 3,500 feet. He said the same thing applies with the major Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 19 employment center, regional shopping area, they are not direct distances. You have to go through the "mousetrap" of north Fort Collins. Mr. Mussard said the storm drainage problem had been brought up several times, in previous meetings, and has not been satisfactorily answered. It has been said that all of this would be taken care of. The Power's family has given some specific problems with the drainage. He pointed out an area on the map and located a basin stating there is no drainage at this time. He also said there is a ridge that surrounds an area where water stands after a good rain or if irrigation ditches are not shut off after a time. His question was if the developers were planning to drain the entire surrounding area, or just the subdivision. He said drainage has not been addressed. Mr. Mussard said there has not been any presentation to the neighborhood as to specifics of what is the quality of construction. There have been numbers given with no specific information. He referenced the shades of color discussed earlier in the meeting, red or maroon. The neighbors do not know what kind • of external surface will be on the houses and yet there is an expectation that this is a wonderful plan for this community. If specific colors are addressed in south Fort Collins, it would be polite for the neighbors to see what kind of buildings we are going to have directly across the road from where we live, for simple courtesy. Mr. Mussard said it has been relayed by the City that services have to go through the County, who have been told in the past that this is not a problem. Where are agreements between the two agencies that anyone else on Ford Lane is injured and 911 is called, how clear is it to the dispatcher when we on the County side as opposed to the City side. He knows that the ambulance service serves the county and the fire department serves the county. Who comes to check the break-in? Who is the first police officer to arrive? Is it City or County? He stated there will be some confusion when the center line of the road is considered. How do I know which side I am on? Mr. Mussard was concerned about the upgrade on only one side at this time and we have not been given an adequate answer as to how this impacts our side of Ford Lane. Will we be required, now or in the future, to put in curb, gutter and sidewalks? What is going to be put in on the City side as far as curb, gutter and sidewalk? Right now, it the rain's real good, his water runs into his lawn. I think that is great, I am saving water and I am not using water. I am conscious of that and I an careful of it. If I have to put in curb and gutter, I have a whole new picture, a small item, but it Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 20 concerns me because of the impact of having two different agencies on either side. Mr. Mussard urged the Board to review the numbers and to look at the situation first hand, drive around on Country Club, on Spaulding, on Ford Lane, park there for about an hour and see if you think 100 vehicles will use Ford Lane on any day right now. This number is excessive and he has no idea where it came from. It is not in the report. Please look at the drainage and the basin, please review the traffic situation and do some arithmetic. It doesn't match up. Again, he reiterated that piece -meal development will self -perpetuate itself right on to the Wyoming line. Ms. Dauda Brooks - 2116 Ford Lane - She wanted to go on the record without repeating her neighbors that she has the same concerns. She said there should be a "holistic" view of development, planning, as is being done in the Harmony Corridor Project, and should be done on a small plot as well. She thought the density was too high. CITIZEN INPUT CLOSED. Chair Cottier said she would restate the questions raised by the citizens. The first question is concerning the traffic issues, specifically the accuracy of the traffic study and the implications for the proposed access onto Ford Lane onto Country Club Road. Tom Vosburg of the Transportation Department was asked to respond. Mr. Tom Vosburg, City Transportation Department, Transportation Planner. He addressed questions raised by the citizens: (1) The estimate of existing traffic on Ford Lane was too high at 100, and it was pointed out that the assumptions used in the traffic study were applied. It should be more like 50 trips per day. Mr. Vosburg said the gentleman was right, the report is wrong. The current traffic on Ford Lane is about 50 trips a day. He didn't believe that significantly changed the conclusions of the traffic study, although the additional trips estimated to be generated by the new development are appropriately calculated and if anything, that error results in overstating the total amount of traffic that will be carried on Ford Lane and Country Club Road, but just a very small amount. (2) The total amount of new trips generated by Falcon Ridge was discussed. He believed the gentleman used his own estimate of approximately 350 daily trips based on the 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 21 information he got out of the traffic study. Again, that is correct, it is roughly the total average daily trips that this development will generate and put on Ford Lane. He said he would like to put it into context. The 350- 400 trips is well within the capacity of residential streets in Fort Collins. The Transportation Department doesn't consider residential streets busy until the count is over 750 and closer to 1,000 average daily trips. Two weeks ago, we heard from residents of an area called Imperial Estates, which is a county subdivision where residents were concerned about maintaining a rural life style. The streets within Imperial Estates carry approximately 400 daily trips now, so the future volumes on Ford Lane would be in that ball park, or slightly lower. (3) The safe stopping distance between Ford Lane and potential access point that a gentleman pointed out was discussed. He stated that in his conversations with a State Highway Engineer that 200 feet is the required safe stopping distance. He is correct. An additional access . point could be provided in that general area, and he indicated on the site plan that it would be feasible and safe from a Transportation point of view. The volumes forecast don't require that there be an access from a different point or multiple accesses, but it would be a safe, feasible access point. Another point of concern was raised regarding existing backup on Terry Lake Road and Highway 287 and that intersection in the mornings at the red light. The State will be improving that intersection. The applicant touched on it briefly in his presentation. They will be reconstructing that whole area and putting in double left turn lanes along with right turn lanes, so the operation of the intersection should be improved significantly with the project. It was his understanding that project is supposed to be under construction within a year, although he did not have all the details. Member Strom asked Mr. Vosburg about the possibility of an additional access point within the development and what do he see as projections for longer term traffic on Country Club Road. Would this be a problem? Mr. Vosburg wasn't sure that he understood correctly. What is the long-range project volume of Country Club Road? Was the second question related to adding an access point? Country Club Road now • carries approximately 2,000 vehicles per day. The traffic study forecasts long range in the year 2015 that will be 3,500 vehicles Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 22 per day. The effect of adding an additional access point or moving the proposed access point wouldn't have any affect whatsoever on the total volume on Country Club Road because it is the same amount of trips being generated by the development just being disbursed to Country Club Road in a different way. If, for instance, an additional access point was provided within this development at the point suggested by one of the gentlemen who testified, the affect would be that it would be spread out over two access points onto Country Club Road. From a general practice point of view, the aim is to take advantage of existing access and limit access onto a road in order to improve the flow on that road. Providing multiple points of access on Country Club Road may impede the flow of traffic than if the access was concentrated at one point. The flip side of that is providing multiple points of access disburses the traffic more within the area that is generating the traffic. Member Strom asked if his view of Country Club Road is to serve as a collector street? Mr. Vosburg said that is correct. Member Strom stated that we have a lot of concern if there are multiple accesses to arterial but not to collectors. Mr. Vosburg Said that is correct. Member Strom also asked about the Highway 1 intersection improvements. To your knowledge, are they planning to change the alignment or location of the intersection, or are they simply upgrading it and how does that interplay with Spaulding Lane connection? Mr. Vosburg said there is significant realignment of the intersection, and it is difficult to explain verbally. He chose a graphic that was well suited. He explained the funded project "in the works". Terry Lake Road will come down and be realigned to come directly across the bottom of Terry Lake and intersect Highway 287. He pointed out where the new intersection would be constructed with double left -turn lanes and other improvements. This small ditch crossing, which is a bridge now in between Spaulding Lane intersection and N. College, would be removed. Spaulding Lane would follow the old Terry Lake Road alignment up to the new intersection of the realignment of Terry Lake Road at another point. This would separate the intersection of Spaulding Lane and Terry Lake Road and Highway 287. There will be considerable offset, where now there is very little offset in that area. The angles of intersection will also be improved. • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 23 Member Strom asked if the projection is day for this development onto Country projection for traffic via Spaulding? for roughly 350 trips per Club Road? What is the Mr. Vosburg answered yes to the first question. The traffic study focuses on peak hours only. He did his own estimations backing up the ADT for Fort Lane, but has not done the same for Spaulding, but said roughly their distribution between the two points is pretty much an even split 60-40, roughly the same kind of volume. Spaulding Lane roughly carries 500 ADT. Their traffic study estimated that in the year 2015, it would carry approximately 750 ADT. The actual long-range projections for Spaulding Lane is low, closer to 1,500 ADT. While there is a difference in numbers, that is within the ball park in a residential street in Fort Collins, although it is starting to get busier than we see in many areas. Vice -Chair Cottier asked, regarding Ford Lane, the upkeep and maintenance questions with the idea of it being half City and half County? Mr. Mike Herzig, Planning Engineer, addressed the question stating • that he had talked with Rex Burns, the County Engineer, about the situation with Ford Lane. It is now a County road. The developer would be required to improve it with curb and gutter on both sides of the street with sidewalks at least on the west side. Maintenance of it is something the County would like to discuss with the City. There is an annual meeting between the City and the County where they divide up areas like this and determine the most logical organization to maintain the road. Because the City would be maintaining all the streets in this new development, it would be logical that the City would take over the maintenance of Ford Lane in accordance with full improvement to City standards. Vice -Chair Cottier said "...full improvements on the east side of the street?" Mr. Herzig said they would have to reconstruct the whole street, and the City requires that the curb and gutter be installed on the other side. That would still depend upon a design and working with the residents along the frontage to determine how the elevation should work and whether that causes problems for those properties. That is yet to be done within the final design phases of this project. Vice -Chair Cottier asked that for the City to take over full responsibility for that street, it would have to be improved on the east side? • Mr. Herzig said the whole street has to be improved. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 24 Vice -Chair Cottier asked if it would be the financial responsibility of the homeowners on Ford Lane? Mr. Herzig said it would be the full responsibility of the developer, because of their impact on the existing street, to reconstruct the street and put a concrete border on the street to take care of the requirement that there is a gutter on a City - standard street. Vice -Chair Cottier asked about the inadequate infra -structure existing there, water, water pressure, sewer? Can you address those? Mr. Herzig said no he could not, it would have to be done by Elco if they are providing the water, they would have to respond to that question. Mr. Edward Lawler, the applicant, said he would not speak for Elco but what they have told them they can supply the area well. By looping, the pressure should be improved quite possibly. The sanitation, Cherry Hills Sanitation (name of company muted) also feels that the lines that have been there are quite capable of holding the subdivision. They had designed their lines bigger for more development in this area, compared to farther east where a lot of development is going. So they are actually in favor of using the infrastructure they already have in place. Vice -Chair Cottier directed a question to Mr. Paul Eckman, Deputy City Attorney, brought out by a citizen stating that a legal description was inaccurate for the annexation and also the triangular piece shown in the northwest corner was not owned by the developer, therefore, could it be used as a detention pond for this development. Are there any problems with us considering this project proposed with those legal questions? Deputy City Attorney Eckman said when the annexation petition was submitted, the certification of the developer's attorney said all of the owners of the property described in the annexation had signed the annexation petition. The City does not do its own title search, it relies upon the attorney to certify that for the City. We are relying on that and will continue to rely on it unless we have some more definitive information that would indicate to the contrary. Regarding the legal description not closing, he thought he would have to refer to Mike Herzig or one of the engineers who have examined the legal description. The City Attorney's Office doesn't plot them out to examine if they close or not. Generally, as £ar as the Law is concerned, if the legal description is sufficient to give reasonable notice of the land that is proposed to be annexed, I think we wouldn't have to worry about it. If it • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 25 is not sufficient for that, then it leaves open the question what land is sought to be annexed, and I think that would present a problem. Mr. Olt answered that with respect to the legal descriptions that were submitted with the petitions for annexation, he was made aware by Mr. Powers that there were some discrepancies. Mr. Olt had the city's Land Surveyor run a closure check on those legal descriptions and he indicated that they did close, but unfortunately, Mr. Olt did not have the annexation files with him; however, he could produce that. He gave closure checks on the annexations. Realize that annexations are developed from legal descriptions, they are not field surveyed. After he is finished, he would like Mr. Rutherford to tell us where the legal descriptions came from. Those were supplied and certified by the applicant's attorney. The City Survey says that the legal descriptions did, in fact, close. Mr. Dick Rutherford, engineer and surveyor on this project, said there has also been title insurance, through American Heritage Title Insurance Company, and has issued policy on this. It has • been checked and rechecked, so he didn't think that there is a possibility of a problem in the title. It is very remote. They have issued a policy from the Ford Estate, through the developers, where the descriptions came from and the insurance company has insured the descriptions. Vice -Chair Cottier asked if it pertained to the triangular piece? Mr. Rutherford said yes, there is actually two parcels, a deed to the triangular parcel, and that is the way the Ford Estate had gotten it to 1960 something. Hark and Heritage Title didn't have any problem with it. Vice -Chair Cottier said none -the -less there seems to be issues about drainage, where the detention pond should be located and does it adequately handle the drainage from this site. Mr. Rutherford said there has been a preliminary drainage report done on this. It is broken into two basins, the north two-thirds of the property drains to the triangular area. He didn't know if the Board members were acquainted with the area specifically but it is very low, quite a bit lower than the highway. It will work very nicely for a detention pond. In fact, for the historic flows, it will be let out at the historic rate and continue down Highway 1. The other detention pond is in the southwest corner of the property, and it will discharge at a historic rate onto Spaulding Lane, which also goes west to the Larimer-weld Canal. 0 Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 26 Mr. Eckman had one other comment to make on the annexation, ownership and so on. The Annexation Statutes of the State call for a person having the right to challenge an annexation within 60 days after the effective date of the annexation. This challenge is to be brought in the district -- in this case, Larimer County. The 60 days has not yet run regarding the time, Statute of Limitation regarding the challenging of the annexation; however, the Statute also says that "any party bringing such action shall first have filed a motion of reconsideration within ten (10) days of the effective date of the ordinance, finalizing the challenged annexation, which motion shall state with particularity the grounds upon which the judicial review is sought." Mr. Eckman stated that no motion for reconsideration has been filed, with my knowledge,d within ten (10) days of the effective date of the annexation ordinance. It is his opinion that it is too late to challenge the annexation. Mr. Basil Hamdan, Civil Engineer, of the Storm Water Utility Department, said he would address questions concerning drainage. Mr. Hamdan showed on a slide the area to be releasing near the Powers property. One of the questions asked of them was to ascertain how the drainage will work on Terry Lake Road and how they will mitigate any release there. Another question concerned the other detention pond with a low area and staff wants to make sure that whatever is going on in the area does not exceed street capacity. These two issues have been raised and asked of them, but have not received re -submittal on those. At this point, we can only hope that they will meet them, and they are usually addressed with the final submittal requirements. Vice -Chair Cottier asked of the applicant about a homeowners association and what about elevations for the proposed homes. Is there any idea.what the houses would look like? Mr. Olt responded by saying that elevations have not been typically reviewed for single-family residential development, be it the north or south side of Fort Collins. We do not typically ask for building elevations for single-family residential, but it is something that can certainly be considered. Mr. Lawler said that there will be a homeowners association. The papers are not drawn up since it is in such an early stage at this point for that. As far as the elevations for the houses, this is just a preliminary, and we don't want to get too far into things before we find out what kind of problems may arise. There have been preliminary discussions with Tom Bolt, an architect from Boulder. It is the applicant's intention to retain his services to design five or six designs specifically for this site. New designs will include masonry on the exteriors and upgraded roofing 0 • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 27 material. We have not sat down and drawn the designs yet. They will be professionally done and tasteful and a benefit to the neighborhood. Member Strom asked for the citizen's question about the sidewalk issue in this area. Mr. Olt said internally within Falcon Ridge PUD, they are proposing sidewalks throughout, on both sides of the streets, sidewalks along Country Club Road and sidewalks along at least the west side of Ford Lane. So typically, this would have to meet the standard City criteria for streets and sidewalks. Member Strom asked other than within the development itself, is there any pedestrian facilitation from this area to the school or park site? Mr. Olt said there is not to date, and that dialogue hasn't taken place. No, once you leave the area of Falcon Ridge development, there is no sidewalk. Member Strom asked if the City typically looks at off -site improvements to sidewalks. To his recollection, do we? Mr. Olt deferred the question to Mike Herzig. Mr. Herzig stated that the City Code does not address that. The only off -site requirements that can be placed on a developer have to do with off -site street improvements. However, it being a PUD, there have been off -site sidewalks built by developers. Under that type of framework, you can do that. The only thing he wanted to add is that as part of the sidewalk improvements internal to the site, they'd also be improving the sidewalks on frontage of Country Club Road all the way to Highway 1. That doesn't take care of the direction to the schools. Member Strom said speaking of schools, would you address the standard response as it concerns Tavelli Elementary capacity. He was looking at the staff report, and it reports the capacity is there now. Mr. Olt was asked to address the question. Mr. Olt replied that was correct. The capacity did appear to be there. The numbers in terms of children generated from any development of this nature, based on elementary, junior high, and high school, is given to us by the school district. Member Cottier asked if the school district have a policy that defines that to walk in, there must be sidewalks, and is the school district aware that these kids are within the walking distance and there are no sidewalks? Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 28 Mr. Olt replied that he was unable to answer that question tonight; but would research that and have an answer. Mr. Vosberg added that within the safe routes to school program, some safe routes to school do utilize areas where there are no sidewalks. Member Cottier asked if they had considered extending the northern east -west street out to Highway 1 as your access rather than going out to Ford Lane or up to Country Club? Mr. Lawler replied that they did not discuss that in great length. They did check, and it was from the guidelines they were given on distance from that intersection, they would not have been able to do it. Because of the land point sticking up at Spaulding, they would have to be fairly north with a east -west route. It was our opinion that would not be something that would be acceptable in the traffic design. Member Cottier asked why was the stub on the middle east -west shown? Mr. Lawler replied for interconnection with future sites. Member Cottier asked if that would have the same problem? Mr. Lawler replied he did not think the intent was ever to go clear across to Highway 1. He thought that's to allow further development, some other attachment. Interneighborhood connection is all the intent was. Member Cottier asked what their position was on connecting to Country Club through their eastern cul-de-sac rather than having the two access points onto Ford Lane? Mr. Lawler replied that their conceptual review, initially, when they first designed this development, was to have an access to Country Club; and we were advised at that time by Transportation they'd rather us not do that, so they altered their plan to this plan. They never have been against that, and they could take this cul-de-sac onto Country Club if that was the Board's desire. Mr. Sherman added that if they were to do that, they are right at the minimum density requirement right not, basically, a number of things in the course of laying out this project and getting to the point that they were at now. They would be in the position of losing a lot both in terms of their density count, and that also a solar lot. Losing that lot was not without financial cost to them. It was something that they were willing to do in order to try and be cooperative with the neighbors and to relieve some problems that Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 29 may exist there, if they can work that out in terms of some of those requirements. Mr. Sherman also added that going across the drainage field, the 1.46 acre there that's shown in yellow, there's something on the order of a 16-foot elevation change there from their property down to the bottom of that and back up to Highway 1. He thought that it was impractical to try to put a street up there. There would be a 30-degree angle at Highway 1 intersection and that would make it tough to get out onto the road. Mr Sherman also responded that as far as the stub out on Golden Eagle Drive, which is the center east -west street, he thought that it's always more something the City would like us to do to allow for future development if that parcel to the west of them ever desires to develop. Member Klataske asked about accessing Country Club Road from what is not a cul-de-sac and perhaps working with the neighbors along Ford Lane, converting that to a cul-de-sac to relieve their concerns about traffic along there. Mr. Olt replied there had been ongoing discussion since worksession. He knew that the applicants have talked with Tom Vosberg with the Transportation Department. He asked Mr. Vosberg to respond to that question. Member Klataske asked if there was a concern about having two points of access to Country Club that close together? Mr. Vosberg replied no. That would be acceptable. Mr. Olt added that regarding cul-de-sacking Ford Lane, he assumed when they said cul-de-sacking, they meant cul-de-sacking the northern end of it where it intersects County Club Road now. Member Klataske replied that was correct. Mr. Vosberg stated from a traffic feasibility point of view, it would work okay. The numbers supported one point of access not. He did not know .what was involved in the process of vacating the right-of-way and closing off a street in terms of just --part of it's County, but it could be explored. Member Klataske thought it would alleviate the traffic coming along Ford Lane for this subdivision, making the subdivision possible for the traffic going onto Country Club Road, as opposed to putting it down on Ford Lane. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 30 Member Klataske asked about solar orientation and the request for 60 single family lots. After calculation of the number of lots to come up with the percentage of 55 percent, they were only talking 32 of the 58 lots. It's off by the one earlier. What was the difference there? Mr. Olt replied that the difference was the ordinance specifies that -- it related to lots of 15,000 square feet or less. Granted, a lot in excess of 15,000 square feet maybe could qualify as, but it did not meet the definition of the ordinance. Therefore, there were two lots --unless something is changed, that are in excess of 15,000 square feet. Therefore, they do not have to comply with the ordinance. Therefore, they were looking at 32 of the 58 that are subject to the ordinance that are in compliance. Member Klataske asked if either of the two lots that are in excess of 15,000 square feet complied. Mr. Olt replied that the theory is that when the ordinance was adopted in excess of 15,000 square feet, they cannot comply because you've got enough space on that lot to be able to orient the house any way you want. Member Klataske asked if there would be streetlights? Mr. Olt replied that there would be. Member Cottier asked about construction traffic. Mr. Lawler replied they had not discussed that, but that could be easily be routed separately as an access off of Country Club. That was not a problem with them. Member Strom moved for approval of Falcon Ridge PUD - Preliminary, recognizing the findings of fact in the staff report, with the authorization for the solar orientation variance, and with one condition that staff and developers explore this question of an additional access point onto Country Club Road in some more detail before we get to the final. A second condition that we at least get some sketch plan elevations, since the neighborhood has requested that prior to the final. Member Klataske seconded the motion adding a third condition about finding out about access to school, whatever off -site improvements might be required to get the kids from this subdivision out, going down on Country Club Road or onto Lemay, if it's going to require a ditch crossing or what; so they're getting points with this right now for being in proximity to the school, and yet the distance is as a bird flies, and these kids are going to have to swim a ditch or something. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 31 Member Strom asked what specifically would be the point? Member Klataske replied that there be some, within the 3500 feet to the park. If that involves a ditch crossing off -site, then that would have to be provided. Member Strom preferred to vote on that as an amendment and have some discussion on it. Member Walker seconded the motion as stated. Member Strom commented that he was not exactly sure where they would be on that. The only reason he was reticent to take it on as a friendly amendment is he was not sure about the precedent, since he did not remember them having done that before. He asked the staff for some feedback on that. Member Klataske stated if giving them points for being within the 3500 foot of the school, that it should be within 3500 foot walking distance. In other words, they shouldn't be given the points for it. • Mr. Olt replied the way it's been dealt with, was that the distances have been defined as the crow flies. That's how they have been done on any development. So this would be a unique situation in this case. Granted, there were concerns about the safety of the movement of the children down Country Club Road, but in terms of the direct, almost the direct, access to Tavelli school, in this case, is down Country Club Road, and then it is just around the corner on Lemay Avenue, so there aren't ditches to cross, there aren't these things. Be it as the crow flies or as the street flies, he thought it was within that distance. Member Klataske asked how about the same thin as far as the park, you know, where they're given points for being within proximity to the park? y Mr. Olt replied the park's a different situation. The location of the park, granted, it's a little more difficult to get to the park via streets. And that would increase the distance. But again, the way we have interpreted the points charts in the Land Development Guidance System, it's a straight-line distance from the closest point of the development to the closest point of that criteria, whatever it may be; in this case, the park. Member Cottier thought that points out an area that they need to look at, because the distance makes no difference if it's not • accessible. The motion passed 4-1 with Member Klataske voting in the negative. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 32 ITEM 5 - INDIAN HILLS VILLAGE PUD - FINAL •81-93A Ms. Kirsten Whetstone, Project Planner, gave the staff report and indicated changes in the packet they received Friday, noting a new page 3 and 4 and bolded sections explaining setbacks and maximum heights for buildings. These changes will be reflected on the plans. Mr. Jonathan Prouty of Laginitas Company, planner, designer, and developer of the project gave out additional materials to the Board members. He gave a detailed presentation of the project for Indian Hills. He explained the cottage home concept, tree buffering and design, building heights, drainage, narrower streets, setbacks, density, etc. (Detailed information was in the materials submitted. He requested that the Board accept the Final plans for Indian Hills Village PUD. Mr. Richard Rutherford, Consultant Engineer, stated the report Mr. Prouty gave covered the major areas of concern. He added that they have worked to save all existing trees and in just a few places there are landscape timbers and design changes to accommodate preserving the trees and provide an adequate drainage channel. Mr. George Betz - 1101 Kirkwood - He is associated with the project in that he was the original developer of the Indian Hills Project for around 15 years. He said the original design was for higher density and height. He said that the site was very difficult to work with from a developers standpoint and that Mr. Prouty had done an excellent job. He supported the project and requested approval by the Board. CITIZEN INPUT Mr. Bruce Cohen - 1812 Bush Court - He was co -presenter of a group representing the neighborhood on Bush Court. He presented a packet of documents to the Board, entering them into as evidence. He used a slide presentation to support the concerns of the neighbors. He focused on the following issues of concern for the neighborhood. 1. History - The PUD was first established for Indian Hills in 1979, with a 40-foot setback between existing property lines and the townhouses. He has resided there since 1988, relying on the previous PUD requirements. There were plans for a private school that fell through. The site was acquired by Jonathan Prouty. The original the neighbors heard of the Indian Hills Development was in December of 1993 and referred to the minutes of the neighborhood meeting. The following issues were brought up: height of new homes, the setback from Bush • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June '6, 1994 Page 33 Court, drainage issues, trees and buffering issues, placement of garages, light pollution, Stuart Street Issues (safety, parking, etc.). He believes, the issues were not resolved. He referred to All Development Criteria with the following concerns: building height and views, shading, setback, landscape, site lighting a noise and vibration. He wasn't sure where drainage went, perhaps sewage and waste? The Bush Court neighbors are concerned about: open side yards, tree buffering, small lots and height and size of homes. Staff recommended conditional approval at preliminary and the neighbors were concerned about page 1 and the confusion if the old PUD is still in existence or not, the existence of the landscape buffer, neighborhood compatibility, storm water, drainage, grading, existing vegetation, flood plain issues and that these would be resolved before final approval. There have been so many changes made over the past several months, he was uncertain if they have been resolved before final. The replacement schedule for the existing landscape, that has to be approved by the City Natural Resource Department, and there is uncertainty if it is really approved. • On March 31, the final PUD was submitted, and during April and May many changes took place after final had been submitted, drainage changes, property line (trees along the buffer). So it is unclear to him where the property line exists. On June 1, the developer, not with the Busch Ct. neighborhood. It was a productive meeting to resolve issues and came up with common ground: the neighbors are not opposing development and support it but feel it needs improvement according the neighbors. There is cooperation between the neighbors and the developers, there is a report on the results of the meeting in the packet submitted, concerns the single-family dwellings and quality of the homes. Both the developer and neighbors are frustrated with the inconsistent and changing plans, the survey dated May 11, 1994, showed the property line for the trees belonging to the Busch Court Neighbors, last week it was found not the case, the trees are on the Indian Hills PUD property. Some frustrations with the development plan are: (1) Engineering changes, i.e., two drainage plans, both with the same date on them, that are very different and confusing. For one of them to work they would have to remove all existing trees. • (2) Height of homes was reported as a concern of both the neighbors and the developer. They would like to see them reduced. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 34 (3) Innovative concepts of the project are good but with some concerns for garage placement to the rear of buildings and small lots which result in small setbacks (concerns for drainage and landscape buffer, aesthetics, roads too close). These challenges need to be overcome. Hari - 1840 Bush Court - He addressed: (1) Neighborhood Compatibility - the neighborhood believes it has not been met effectively. The existing neighborhood is mainly single-family homes with a cluster of townhouses with heights not exceeding 24 feet and ample green space between them. He referred to a letter written by Keith Weir to the Board pointing out structures in the project only 15 feet from his property line. He states it will have a negative impact on his property value if plans proceed and other neighbors feel this may also negatively impact their property values. A normal two-story home is 22' to 24' in height he believed. A normal ranch -style is 14' to 16' in height. The proposed homes can be 30' to 35' in height. The highest existing homes are 22' to 24' height. He used slides to illustrate his point. He pointed out that 35' would be higher than existing trees. (2) Safety - He pointed out Lesser Junior High students needing to walk along Stuart. The entry way to the proposed development further complicates the traffic geometry and substantially compromises the safety of all forms of traffic, particularly pedestrians and bicyclists. It would seem prudent to study this area very carefully. He has witnessed two near misses with auto/bikers just recently near Stuart/Stover. (3) Item #30 All Development Chart - Shadows Cast. (4) Safety of the proposed sidewalks and parking slots proposed for the handicapped who may reside in the homes. Ron Fowler - 1824 Bush Court - He addressed drainage issues. He reported the 100-year flood elevations of 4968' and 49701. He pointed out that Spring Creek Pond is 4969' and there is a drop of elevation at Arthur's Ditch above Indian Hills West of about 241. The drainage that is planned will drain around existing resident's back fences. There are homeowners that already experience damp basements. The contractor shows drainage away from Bush Court, yet City maps shown drainage onto Bush Court. There will be damage to trees along the drainage ditch. He read from a prepared statement. Because of the history of drainage concerns and current water impacts, the impenetrable surfaces of the project, drainage should be studied very carefully. He was concerned that the project was • Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 35 being rushed through to obtain approval before the drainage issue has been addressed properly. Sonia Nornes - 1808 Bush Court - She addressed landscape buffer, tree line, privacy, light and noise pollution. Her concerns included the 9 foot distance of backyards to roads and street lighting. There is not a continuous landscape buffer on all properties to the new project. Her concern was the drainage plan impacts on the 10-year landscape replacement plan without adequate space for the necessary setbacks in tree -line buffering. Tree root damage may result in loss of trees where drainage ditches will be dug. She made a point that evergreens, such as spruces, need 30 feet of space, quite a bit more than deciduous. She requested that these issues be addressed by appropriate city departments before final approval. Mr. Bruce Cohen summarized by stating that the project be slowed down to get detailed plans in order to address issues raised by the neighbors this evening. He recommended the old PUD requirements would take care of several issues of concern, setback, height • issues, excavating of trees along the drainage ditch, and tree replacement. The concern for the garage placements. He questioned open space areas not being adequate. He requested the removal of two homes, as stated in a letter from Mr. Prouty of May 19, 1994, but six days later it was withdrawn. CITIZEN INPUT CLOSED Vice -Chair Cottier asked that the drainage concerns and the tree replacement plans be addressed by City staff. What does shadow analysis show, and does the PUD meet City requirements? Does the drainage plan affect the existing trees and buffering of existing landscaping? Ms. Whetstone addressed the tree replacement question stating that the Forestry Department has recently reviewed both the existing tree replacement plan and the drainage plan. Natural Resources reviewed it just last week and both agreed that the plan is a good plan, excellent in detail. There is a signed copy in the packet. Some elms have been removed by neighbors and that is why there are gaps. The developer said he would replace them appropriately or with whatever trees the neighbors wanted. She deferred the drainage issue to Storm Water Utility. She mentioned the criteria for the shadow question and pointed out the existing trees of 35, in height would cast a longer shadow than the buildings. • Vice -Chair Cottier stated that the document received by the Board is a draft of the neighborhood agreements reached at a June 1st meeting. She asked if this document could be added to the development agreement. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 36 Paul Eckman answered if they are agreements that have been met by the developer and the neighbors they could be worked out with Mr. Eckman , Mr. Herzig and the developer, Mr. Prouty, and to make sure it was the agreement they reached with the developer. Basil Hamdan, Storm Water Utility Department, stated that drainage has been a troubling issue with this project and a controversial issue. The main concern of the Busch Court neighbors is whether the PUD will be able to drain the west part of the site without impacting their properties. He went into detail of the changes in the drainage plans through the planning process for this project. The proposed plan now drives the drainage through a pipe, alleviating the concerns. In some areas there are tight constraints, with trees, home placements and allowance for the 100 year flood plains (the tightest constraint being 140% of the City 100% flow requirements are 133% so the present exceeds the minimum requirement. The Plan still needs work with the City Forester to meet constraints of the existing trees. Vice -Chair Cottier asked if the sign -off by the City Forester and Storm Water Utility believe that the trees will survive the drainage swale? Ms. Whetstone replied that in those areas, if there is a problem with the trees, there is a remote possibility that some trees will not make it. At the current time there is a densely planted landscape buffer over and above what the City requires as a buffer, plus a 6-foot high solid -wood fence. There is no requirement in the LDGS for a landscape buffer to be solid. If a few trees were lost, this would not significantly impact of the quality of buffer provided. She further stated that there is a standard planned unit development condition, attached to Staff recommendation, to review and approve the storm drainage plans and utility plans before the utility plans are filed and development agreement is signed. Mr. Hamdan said that the Board can approve land use and layout, but the Storm Drainage approval will be about three months behind the Planning and Zoning Board approval before the utility plan and development agreement can be resolved and approved. This is standard on nearly all PUDs. The neighbors will be able to resolve their questions during this time, and he believed they could be resolved. Vice -Chair Cottier stated that no building permits could be issued before these issues are resolved to the satisfaction of the City, as no permits are issued with a final plat, utility plans, and development agreement. . Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 37 Member Strom asked, in reference to the neighbors questions concerning damp basements, if in Mr. HamdanIs judgment the drainage plan would have effect on that? Mr. Hamdan said, most of their seepage problems are coming from the Arthur Ditch and that is probably not going to change with this development. He stated there would be less percolation as a result of the PUD and water will be approved off of Indian Hills West Village and conveyed via pipe going, under that swale, directly to Spring Creek. If any thing, the PUD and drainage solution it will reduce the ground water levels in that area. Mr. Prouty stated that the program originally planned with Forestry was not a one-shot program, but it takes care of existing trees and neighbors needs on an on -going basis. The property line goes just outside their fence. All original corner markers have been located for them and marked by his Engineer. The trees along the old tree line, proceeds two -three feet down to the east of their fence line. The developer proposes a four- to six-foot wide tree buffer east of the fence, exclusively for trees, with no grading. This was done only after consulting with the City Forester because of concern for tree roots. They have complied with the requirements of the City Forester, to preserve the existing trees. Vice -Chair Cottier asked, regarding the drainage plan about a written commitment from the Indian Hills West townhouse that they would not make any modifications which would affect the drainage plan? Mr. Hamdan stated that the townhouse PUD is a completely developed area and only on newly developed areas can conditions be placed. There is an existing condition that states that site drainage across the newly developed site (Indian Hills Village), including off -site flows from the townhouses will be routed through the swale or pipe/or combination. There cannot be a retro-active condition on Indian Hills West Village. Ms. Whetstone said if Indian Hills West were to propose something that would add more than 350 square feet of impervious surface, it would require a drainage report and an administrative change, which would be referred to storm water. Mr. Hamdan said if there were a significant change, they would have to go through the process and be reviewed against today's requirements. Member Strom asked about the traffic geometry with access to Stuart Street. Is it reasonable to assume that they meet City standards? Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 38 Ms. Whetstone said the Transportation Department required some restriping of Stuart and turn lanes for the PUD. It would meet requirements of traffic volumes. Mr. Herzig said the specifics of the street plan have not been reviewed. In older neighborhood areas, they often do not meet current City standards for streets. The question would be whether or not it would function safely. At this location the intersection will work with sidewalks, proper site distances and visibility. It doesn't necessarily mean that it meets City standards but it will work when the departments are finished reviewing and approving the plans. The safety standards are not being compromised, rather they are reviewing issues of maintenance and construction methods affecting the City. Member Walker had a question regarding Lot #40, with a drainage easement to the property line and some question about the development plans. Will that be vacant land? Mr. Prouty said that the plat reflects a 6-foot drainage easement to the property line which would have to be respected, i.e., not buildings, patio are o.k. Mr. Walker observed that scale and bulk of buildings on site #40 and #47 are extremely close to the property line, particularly site #47, near Ware house. For accountability sake, he suggested that they be limited to single -story structures for compatibility to Bush Court residents. He also asked Ms. Whetstone the latest report,of the street width and parking widths of the project. Ms. Whetstone said there are two variances being reviewed by the City. Either a variance from eight feet parking widths (City standard) to seven feet widths or variance to the sidewalk from four feet (City standard) to three feet. There is a memo of May 23, 1994, in the Board's packet reflecting staff s decision for the variance justification. The code allows the variance because of the infill nature and set development patterns established and existing utilities. Either are satisfactory from a Planning Department view. At this time, the Engineering Department doesn't support the variance to the parking, but does support the sidewalk variance. Vice -Chair Cottier asked about the variances connected with this project. Ms. Whetstone said the only thing that Planning is looking at is the sidewalk width. A right-of-way variance was granted at preliminary. Within the row is a standard 36-foot wide street with offsets for parking alternating with landscaping. The sidewalk is located in the right-of-way, as is standard. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 39 Member Klataske asked if there was concern for parking or concern for the turning radius of the street? Ms. Whetstone said her understanding of the concern over the parking was potential encroachment into the 20 foot drive isle, required by the Fire Department. The on -street parking spaces will be of a concrete material as opposed to asphalt. It will be will delineated from the drive aisles. Planning staff believes that there is enough evidence from other cities to support the 7-foot request, and there would not be encroachment into the drive aisles. Member Winfree asked if there were sidewalks on both sides of the street throughout the project? Ms. Whetstone said yes. There are some areas where there are even detached walks. Member Fontana commented that her preference would be to reduce the parking widths and she would go along with the parking variance. Member Fontana moved for approval of the Indian Hills village PUD, Final, with conditions of staff including the variance for parking width. Member Strom asked if .she would accept a friendly amendment that Lots #40 and #47 be restricted to single story houses. Member Fontana approved the suggested amendment. Member Strom seconded the motion. vice -Chair Cottier asked if the June 3, 1994, draft commitments made by the applicant could be attached to the development agreement? Mr. Eckman said he would make sure that this was done, although it could be included as a condition. Was it the parking variance in the motion? You can condition that with the staff being in agreement with the developer and the neighborhood as outlined in the latter in the development agreement. Member Fontana agreed. Member Strom seconded. Member Walker said this project is interesting in the sense that it is a different approach to housing in Fort Collins, and how street widths were mitigated. Something like this is how we can work with • the neighbors and how we can begin to build a compact city. There are some fine attributes that may show how housing will be approached in the future. Planning & Zoning Board Minutes June 6, 1994 Page 40 Member Winfree said she would be supporting the motion and it is not in any way to minimize the concerns that have been brought out about the members of the neighborhood. The concerns are legitimate. Mr. Prouty has taken strides to cover each and every concern brought out and addressed. This property is somewhat difficult to develop and a lot of things have taken into consideration in the design. Member Strom asked if light intensity and scale would be addressed? Ms. Whetstone said that staff has encouraged the applicant to discuss this with Light and Power. Staff will support them by meeting with the applicant and Light and Power. The lighting for public streets is typically designed by Light and Power, who have certain standards that have not been backed down on as yet. The applicant would like to pursue this with them and Planning staff will give support. She said the lamps used in residential areas have the capability of shields to control the lighting areas. The neighbor's concern will be looked into and shields recommended where needed. Member Strom recalled there were lesser lighting standards of intensity on Harmony Road, is that a standardized process, or specific to this project? Ms. Whetstone said Light and Power already has a reduced lighting design for residential areas, but there is not a process in the works for how individual developers to come in and require another system, which might change the inventory of bulbs from what they have now. Perhaps, as there are more of these projects, this would be more realistic. There currently is not a process in place to make a variance to City lighting standards. The Planning staff will work on that. Member Strom said with the agreement of the maker of the motion, he suggest that a condition be added to encourage lesser lighting intensity and that the staff work on that. He withdrew it because there is provision under the June 1, 1994, draft. Informally, he encouraged the staff to work with the developers on this issue of lighting. Vice -Chair Cottier recalled when the intensity of Harmony lighting was reduced, it was based on other cities minimum standards. Could the City request a minimum residential lighting as has been done in other cities? Ms. Whetstone said it was a good point and would be looked into. Motion passed 6-0. Meeting adjourned at 11:12 p.m.