HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 08/16/2001Chairperson Gavaldon called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m.
Roll Call: Torgerson, Meyer, Colton, Bernth, Craig, Carpenter and Gavaldon.
Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Shepard, Olt, Virata, Wamhoff, and Williams.
Agenda Review: Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent
and Discussion Agendas:
Consent Agenda:
1. Minutes of the November 16, 2000 (CONTINUED), February 15
and June 7, 2001 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings.
2. Modifications of Conditions of Final Approval.
3. #21-97A 300 Remington, DMA Plaza —Wireless Telecommunications
Equipment — Project Development Plan
4. #22-01 Poudre School District Facility Services Building — Site Plan
Advisory Review
Discussion Agenda:
5. #3-OOA Front Range Rezone and Structure Plan Amendment
Member Craig pulled Item 2 but would only like the Oakridge Block 1, 2nd Filing, Lots 2
& 3 discussed.
Chairperson Gavaldon pulled Item 4, Poudre School District Facility Services Building
Site Plan Advisory Review.
Member Craig moved to approve consent items 1 (less the November 16, 2000
minutes, Item 2 (with the exception of the Oakridge Block 1, 2nd Filing, Lots 2 & 3)
and Item 3. Member Colton seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
August 16, 2001
Page 2
Project: Modifications of Conditions of Final Approval
Project Description: Request to modify the condition of final PUD approval
for the Oakridge Block 1, 2nd Filing, Lots 2 & 3, which
required that the development agreement, final plans
and final plat be executed prior to the August 16,
2001 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearina Testimonv. Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Member Craig asked staff or the applicant to discuss why something that was approved
in October almost a year ago is still needing an extension.
Marc Virata, Engineering Department replied that he would refer the question to the
applicant and he would provide additional detail if needed.
Trisha Krutch with North Star Design, representing the Everitt Companies spoke for the
applicant. She stated that the project in Oakridge is located between Carabba's Italian
Grill and Associates in Family Medicine. It is an infill project and they are trying to
squeeze a building in between two existing buildings. In doing so, they need off -site
easements from both projects. They have had no problem getting one from Associates
in Family Medicine because Everitt Companies owns it. They have been working
continually with Carabba's to try to get the easement they need to make the connection
between their property and our property. The reason it has taken so long is that they
had made some progress with a contact at Carabba's, that person left and we were not
told, we did not hear from them for a couple of months. We received a new contact,
and gave all the same information and that person also left. We are now in contact with
the head of realty for Carabba's and she sees no problem with the easement at this
point and we have sent her all the same information for her review. She is currently
reviewing the information at this time.
Member Craig asked if Ms. Krutch felt they could wrap this up in about 30 days.
Ms. Krutch replied that was their intent.
Public Input
None.
0
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
August 16, 2001
Page 3
Member Craig moved to modify the condition of the Final PUD approval which
required that the development agreement, final plans and final plat be executed
prior to the August 16, 2001 Planning and Zoning Board meeting for Oakridge,
Block One, 2"d Filing, Lots 2 and 3. The motion includes 30 business days to
October 4, 2001 Planning and Zoning Board Hearing.
Member Bernth seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7-0.
Project: Poudre School District Facility Services
Building — Site Plan Advisory Review, #22-01
Project Description: Site Plan Advisory Review for a new, two-story,
8,876 s.f. office building, crew quarters and
custodial shop located on the Poudre School
District campus. The building would be located
on the south side of LaPorte Avenue, west of
the Administration Building, between Stephens
Street and the west driveway entrance to the
campus. The site is zoned RL, Low Density
Residential.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Chairperson Gavaldon asked Planner Shepard to present the new information that he
had received from the School District.
Ted Shepard, Chief Planner stated that the Board had been delivered in their packets a
letter from Poudre School District Project Manager Ed Holder which addresses the
inclusion in the Power Point presentation a graphic depicting the character elevation of
the proposed building. In the second paragraph Mr. Holder refers to the cost differential
in adding a brick exterior to the building versus the proposed metal siding of the
building.
Ed Holder Project Manager for Poudre School District reviewed graphics of the
elevations on all four sides of the building. He stated that the east elevation now
reflected the galvanized metal look along the bottom of the building. The green trim
reflects the metal roof of the building. They are also carrying the same color scheme
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
August 16, 2001
Page 4
through the windows and some of the entrance features. The cream colored area is a
kind of stucco material. The north elevation, which you would see from LaPorte
Avenue, would have several trees that are planned along that side of the building. The
windows that you see reflect offices. The south elevation, which they consider the front
of the building opens up into the support services complex. That would be when
someone enters into the complex through the gated entrances, they would come into
the building on the south side. The west elevation is very similar. The material shown
in the middle is a recycled rubber shingle, which is also being used on the Staley
Elementary School
Public Input
None.
Chairperson Gavaldon asked about the statement in the memo from the School District
that states that the actual material colors would be selected at a later date and could
change.
Mr. Holder replied that at this point they have not received submittals for the actual
materials that will be used on this facility. They have not selected the final colors. The
general scheme of the galvanized, the greens and the beige will most likely be selected
from the manufacturers color sample. It is not their intent at this point to a select a
different color of galvanized metal.
Chairperson Gavaldon asked if it was similar to the buildings to the east..
Mr. Holder reported that the color scheme does carry further east to their informational
technology building. It has tans, greens and some beige associated with it.
Chairperson Gavaldon asked if the only building that was brick was the administration
building.
Mr. Holder replied that was correct.
Member Craig asked if this building was in the industrial zone, which is the only zone
that allows metal buildings, does this building meet the criteria.
Planner Shepard replied it did.
Member Colton moved for approval of the Poudre School District Facility
Services Building, Site Plan Advisory Review. Member Bernth seconded the
motion.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
August 16, 2001
Page 5
Member Craig commented that she would support this because it does have a fence
and trees that will buffer it from the neighborhood across the street. She can't say that
she is thrilled that we have now moved onto metal buildings and this might be
something we see in the future. She understands that $60,000 to $70,000 adds up
when looking at construction costs, but she also feels that they could have worked with
metal and maybe some brick work, to make it so it is not solid metal.
Member Carpenter commented that she feels that this building could have been made a
lot better for the area and a lot more compatible to the area. Some improvements could
be made to the building that would not cost $60,000 to $70,000 like some brick pillars.
She hoped we would see something better in the future.
Chairperson Gavaldon would support the motion, however he shared the concern of
taxpayer dollars for paying 1.2 million dollars for a metal building. He would like to see
more consistency in blending the buildings together. He felt the building was expensive
for the materials being used. He appreciated the drawings and overlays that they
provided to help with the decision making.
Member Torgerson had concerns with compatibility. The other observation he would
make that is that it seems that a lot of the architectural character and articulation that
occurs does not occur on LaPorte Street, so it might look good from the interior of the
facility, but the view from LaPorte Street will be ugly. He would recommend denial
based on compatibility.
The motion was approved 6-1 with Member Torgerson voting in the negative.
Project: Front Range Rezone and Structure Plan
Amendment, #3-OOA
Project Description: Request to change the zoning on a 28.03 acre
property from C, Commercial to 16.6 acres of
NC, Neighborhood Commercial and 11.4 acres
of MMN, Medium Density Mixed -Use
Neighborhood. The property is located
northwest of Trilby Road and South College
Avenue. The request is also to make an
amendment to the City's Structure Plan Map
for this property from Commercial Corridor
District to Neighborhood Commercial Center
and Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
August 16, 2001
Page 6
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence.
Member Carpenter moved to postpone indefinitely item #5, Front Range Rezone
and Structure Plan Amendment.
Member Meyer seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 7-0.
Other Business:
Cameron Gloss, Director of Current Planning stated that the representative from the
Bureau of Reclamation was there to discuss the stock piling of dirt on the Pineridge
Natural Area.
Brian Pearson, area manager for the Bureau of Reclamation Eastern Colorado Office in
Loveland addressed the board regarding the safety of dams project and the
modernization project that is underway at Horsetooth Reservoir and will soon be
underway at three saddle dams. Associated with the safety of dams modernization
work at Spring Canyon Dam, which is the southern most of the three saddle dams,
there is a need to remove about a half million cubic yards of material from the dam for
placement of a filter membrane and also a stability berm on the downstream face.
The constraints of the canyon and the surrounding topography at Spring Canyon make
it very difficult to stock pile temporarily the half million cubic yards of materials while the
filtering and other materials are put in place. In February of this year, they approached
the Natural Resources staff at the city of Fort Collins to discuss the possibility of using a
20 acre parcel of the Pine Ridge Natural Area immediately east and slightly north of the
north abutment of Spring Canyon Dam.
The staff recommended against their request and then took the request to the Natural
Resources Advisory Board. That was in mid July and the Board strongly advised
against the request. That is the recommendation that they have forwarded to City
Council. Given the notoriety of their request, they are rescinding their request to use
the natural area. This is not a panacea and there will still be drawbacks. The use of the
natural area would have been the most efficient and would have helped assure the
progress and that the work would stay on schedule. It would have been, while a
disturbance to the natural area, hidden from view to all but a handful of residents.
The new option gives the contractor the option of using the north abutment of the dam
to store a portion of the materials. Also, leaves the option on the table of using south
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
August 16, 2001
Page 7
bay and going up the reservoir to store material and also just north of Spring Canyon
Dam to store material. What is by amendment tonight in the press release is that they
are pulling off the option sheet use of the Pineridge Natural Area and also the use of
County Road 38E between the right abutment and the downstream entrance to the
dam. There are still issues to work out on this option. They were respectively
withdrawing their request.
Member Colton commented that he really appreciated them listening to the public input
on this sensitive matter and looking at other options.
There was no other business.
The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.m.