Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 01/23/1989 (2)PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING JANUARY 23, 1989 Minutes The meeting began at 6:32 p.m. in Council Chambers. Members present were Laurie O'Dell, Sandy Kern, Dave Edwards, Frank Groznik, Jim Klataske, Jan Shepard, Rex Burns, and Lloyd Walker. Staff was represented by Tom Peter- son, Joe Frank, Sherry Albertson -Clark, Linda Ripley, Mike Herzig, Bob Wilkin- son, Rick Ensdorff, Paul Eckman and Kayla Ballard. Mr. Peterson reviewed the Consent Agenda which consisted of: Planning and Zoning Board items which included: (2) 035-86G, Clarendon Hills, 3rd Filing - Final; (3) 09-82W, Soulhridge Greens Master Plan, Tract E - Amended Master Plan; (4) #9-82X, Southridge Greens, Fairway Seven PUD - Preliminary; (5) #13-82AM, Oakridge Business Park, Lot 2, llth Filing - Final. (6) #51-88A, West Elizabeth Properties Preliminary PUD. Recommendation Items to City Council items which included: (7) 0101-88,A Harmony/Taft hill Annexation and Zoning; (8) #102-88, A, Highway 14 East First Annexation and Zoning; (9) #103-88, A, Highway 14 East Second Annexation and Zoning; (10) #104-88, A, I-25 First Annexation and Zoning; (11) 0106-88, A, Fort Collins/Loveland Water District Pump Station Annexation and Zoning; (11) #34-88, Interstate Lands First Annexation; (12) #81-88, A, Lemay Avenue First Annexation and Zoning; (13) #81-88B, Lemay Avenue Second Annexation and Zoning; (14) #22-88A Emerson Acres Rezoning; (15) Revisions to Ordinance 113-1987, Minor Plat; and County Referrals items which included; (16) #7-88B, Midland Greens PUD -County Referral. Mr. Peterson then reviewed the Discussion Agenda which included: (17) #61-88D, West Fossil Creek PUD, First Filing, PACE Warehouse -Preliminary; (18) #69-84G, CSU Bull Farm PUD, Parcel D Preliminary; (19) #1-88A, Gateway at Harmony Road - Preliminary PUD; (20) 34-88, Interstae Lands First Annexation; (21) #35-88, Interstate Lands Second Annexation; (22) #38-88, Interstate Lands Tract A Zoning; (23) #39-88, Interstate Lands Tract B Zoning; Mr. Peterson continued Item #15, Revisions to Ordinance 113-1987 Minor Plat Ordinance and Item #19, Gateway at Harmony Road -Preliminary PUD. They would be scheduled to be heard at the February 27, 1989 meeting. Member Klataske pulled Item #1, the minutes, for discussion. Lyal Nelson, asked that Items #3 and #4 be pulled for discussion. Member Edwards noted a conflict of interest on Items #3, #4, and #5. Member Kern moved to approve Items 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16. Member Edwards seconded. The motion passed 7-0. Member Groznik moved to approve Item #5. Member Shepard seconded. The motion passed 7-0, with Alternate Burns filling in for Member Edwards. Member Klataske noted that the minutes did not reflect his abstention from voting on Fox Meadows Master Plan and Fox Meadows Phase One -Preliminary. P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 2 Member Shepard stated the minutes for the Timan Master Plan noted that she asked about access off of College Ave. She requested that the minutes be corrected to state that she asked about access to Skyway. Member Kern asked that corrections to the November 23 be made as follows: Page 2, ".. the owner washed to work .." should be wished; and ".. be a flatter transaction.." should be transition. Member Kern moved to the approve the corrected minutes. Member Klataske seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. Southridae Greens Master Plan Tract E - Amended Master Plan Southridge Greens, Fairway Seven PUD - Preliminary Sherry Albertson -Clark, Project Planner, gave a brief description of the projects. Mr. Nelson stated he had concerns regarding access to his property, which was located to the east of the projects. Mike Herzig, Development Coordinator, said that access to that site would be difficult as it was in between the railroad tracks and the golf course, which limited the access. He believed that access could be from the Oakridge project. Member Groznik moved to approve Items #3 and #4. Member Kern seconded the motion. The motion passed 7-0. Alternate Member Burns voted in place of Member Edwards. #61-88D WEST FOSSIL CREEK PUD, FIRST FILING, PACE WAREHOUSE - Preliminary Paul Eckman, Assistant City Attorney, read into the record letters received regarding this project. Linda Ripley, project planner, gave a brief description of the project. Frank Vaught, Vaught -Frye Architects, began his presentation by stating that warehouse shopping was the fifth largest form of mass merchandising and was not a passing trend. He stated a PACE store in Fort Collins was projected to do approximately $30 million per year in volume and generated about $825,000 in sales tax to the city. He also noted the indirect benefits such as building fees and employment. He stated that staff and the applicants found this site to be acceptable. tic said the south curb cut was to service the trucks and loading trade, located on the southwest portion of the site. The central curb cut was the primary customer access and the last curb cut to the north was also customer access. He stated that they have cut the floor elevation into the hillside about 6 - 12 feet to minimize the impact on College Ave. He said the building would project from 2 - 4 feet above the railroad tracks. He stated that the existing stand of trees will provide a natural screen of the larger parking area and the occupants of the Cameron Office Park. The smaller parking area was along P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 • Page 3 the east side of the building and incorporates four layers of screening, with a fifth and sixth layer planned in the future along Fossil Creek Parkway and College Ave. He said the concrete building w s set back 400' from College Ave. and has pole lighting no greater than 32'. The signage was located on the east facade and on a free-standing sign at the southwest intersection of Fossil Creek Pkwy. and College Avenue. It complied with the sign code. He said that they have assembled a team to address the environmentally sensitive areas as well as the storm drainage, traffic and water quality, but pointed out that it was a preliminary plan. They did not have all the answers but what they have submitted, was acceptable by city requirements. Stan Myers, RBD Engineers, gave a background of the area. He pointed out it was included in the Fossil Creek Basin, which was bounded by the foothills, north of Harmony Road and south of Trilby Road. It comprised 20.9 square miles. He stated that the Fossil Creek Master Drainage Plan, completed in 1982, was reviewed by the City of Fort Collins, Larimer County and Colorado Water Conservation Board. This report included a hydro -analysis with both fully developed conditions and existing conditions, using a storm water management (swm) model. The report also includes a hydraulic analysis to determine the water surface elevations during various storm periods. He stated that the recommendation which came out of these studies indicated detention at the PACE site was not needed. He stated the storm water peak just below South College Avenue was 2,200 c.s.f. less than the peak found on Lemay Avenue. The flows off the PACE site, in the 100 years storm were about 92 c.s.f.. He said the peak would hit below S. College Ave. about 15 minutes after the storm and this was a situation which was not detained. If they were forced to detain on -site, there would a very good chance the peak would be increased. He stated they have addressed the concerns regarding erosion control during construction, by the use of silk fences and hay bales to limit sedimentation. To address water quality, they would like to utilize the mitigation area by providing areas for the nuisance/low intensity flows to slow down and where solids can settle out. He said they have applied to the Corps of Engineers for any required permits for construction along Fossil Creek. Ed Hyatt, Cityscape, stated the applicants were aware of the intense interest of the citizens and Board of the removal of the cottonwoods along the drainage ditch flowing into Fossil Creek. He stated Terry McKee from the Corps of Engineers was at the site that day and Mr. McKee wanted to see a more defi- nite description of the wetlands. The applicant will engage an environmental consultant to do this survey to determine the wetlands which will be impacted by the development. He explained that they wished to enhance the environ- mentally sensitive area to become a wildlife habitat. The area was currently covered with grasses and sedges, with no brush cover and they would like to introduce more comprehensive plantings to provide cover and food for wildlife. He stated they would attempt to channel the seepage and ground water and detain it momentarily to create an area of enhanced plant growth. tic said the trail would hold flows to increase available water for plants which wold provide wildlife cover and food. This area would also capture sediment and any pollutants. He noted the inclusion of a letter in the Board's packet from • Empire Labs in regards to the fossil deposits on site. P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 4 Bob Leigh, of Leigh, Scott and Cleary, wished to address the relationship of this project and the South College Access Plan and master plan of Fossil Creek. He stated that the recirculation road on the west side of College Ave. would provide a continuous roadway from Crestline on the south to REA on the north. It would provide access at the signal and relieve traffic on College. He said that by using traffic counts of warehouse stores in Denver, it was determined that this store would generate far less than a multi -tenant shopping center. This PACE would be a one destination shopping trip. It would gener- ate 2,500 trips in and out. He stated there would be no backup on College Ave. due to access of the frontage road, but the volume of traffic on Fossil Blvd. would require signalization in the future. Frank Vaught identified the immediate and distant neighborhoods surrounding the site. He stated the PACE finished floor elevation would be 4974, which was similar to a nearby building. He believed that there was no impact to Applewood due to the elevations and natural buffering the rail track provided. He cited the criteria in the LDGS for neighborhood compatibility in Appendix D and believed that the applicant had met those criteria. He stated they were aware of the conditions placed on the project and that they must be addressed prior to final. He asked that the Board review the information and based on that information, grant approval. Member Walker asked how the mitigation area will deal with the 100 year flood flow without washing or eroding the creek. Stan Myers replied that they anticipate that a berm incorporated in the trail system would serve to screen off the area and allow for temporary detention of the mitigation area. He said they would incorporate into the berm a low sidewalk chase that would allow the 100 year flow to top the berm in a weir flow condition and slow the velocity so it would not wash out the berm. Member Walker asked how much water could be detained before there was an overflow condition. Mr. Myers answered that they had not done the grading in the area to deter- mine what the flows would be. The preliminary figures depend on what pond- ing depth was used. He stated they did not wish to create a permanent pond but the figures showed that a 2 or 5 year storm could easily be detained, but could not make a final determination without additional data. Member Walker asked the effect of storm flows on sedimentation and erosion downstream. Mr. Myers stated it may cause increased flows but the hydrographic chart showed it would not increase the peak flows. He stated they would examine measures which would keep the sedimentation at a minimum. Member Shepard asked the role of the Corps of Army Engineers and if they have jurisdiction over wetlands larger than one acre. Mr. Myers stated any wetlands are reviewed by the local Corps office, whose contact person was Terry McKee, to determine whether mitigation was required. • P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 5 Member Shepard asked if that was what was referred to as a nationwide per- mit. Mr. Myers stated that nationwide permit was for wetlands under one acre. Member Shepard asked if a nationwide permit would be required. Mr. Myers replied that the appropriate permit would be determined on the boundaries staked out by the Corp. Member Shepard asked if the mitigation measures would not be known until the area was staked out. Mr. Vaught stated that two assessments to date have been done, a visual one at master plan stage and the general wetlands mapped out for this preliminary plan. The most recent assessment was done by Bob Wilkinson of the City Natural Resources Dept. and Tim Buchannan of the City Parks and Recreation Dept., along with Edward Hyatt. He said in order to satisfy the Corps, an approved consultant must take samples to define the boundaries. If the Corps decided that the wetlands were less than I acres, then mitigation efforts would be voluntary and not required. Member Shepard asked if mitigation efforts were required, what will be pro- posed in the southeast corner. is Mr. Vaught believed that they would use the guidelines for mitigation. The site may be 3/4 of an acre and they need to have an accurate assessment, which they expect soon. Member Groznik asked to have the 1 acre clarified on the drawing. Mr. Hyatt stated the area of mitigation was approximately one acre and that the area to the north was environmentally sensitive but they were included in the mitigation area for the purpose of enhancing wildlife habitat. Member Groznik asked if mitigation measures for the stream bed were included in the one acres. Mr. Hyatt stated that they would not interfere with the stream bed except for storm drainage improvements. Those included plantings in the vicinity of where the embankment fell away, and the east side of the stream to act as a buffer, and food for wildlife, as well as enhancement of creek area. Member Groznik asked if a signal was required at the intersection of College and Fossil Creek Parkway. Mr. Leigh stated a signal was planned if sufficient traffic warranted the need. Member Groznik asked if the traffic warrants would be met due to this partic- ular project. 0 P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 6 Mr. Leigh stated that the warrants were not likely to be met by this develop- ment. Member Edwards asked what the average Saturday trips would be. Mr. Leigh stated about 30% higher than on weekdays, with weekdays averaging 2,500 trips per day. Member Edwards stated that points are taken for not being on an arterial but Mr. Leigh stated that 93% of trip generation would come off College Avenue. He asked how they planned to deal with primary and secondary access. Mr. Leigh stated that 56% of traffic was on S. College Avenue, north of the site and 38% on S. College Ave., south of the site. He said this resulted in traffic impact on the drive times of 4 - 5% of the projected traffic volumes for the year 2010. Member Edwards asked how much of the recirculation road would be built with the PACE project. Mr. Leigh said that looking at the master plan, only a small piece near the nursery would prevent a full connection north. He said that development would need to occur to fully complete the road. Member Edwards stated that the re -circulation road did not appear to defuse the impacts in the near future. Ms. Ripley stated that under review of location criteria described in the Land Use Policies Plan, the project follows these criteria and the land uses are consistent with the approved master plan. She stated the project scored 50% on the auto -related roadside point chart and that the applicant was able to take additional points for non-renewable energy sources. She said a neighborhood meeting was held on December 8, 1988 and the major concerns were the re- alignment of Fossil Creek Parkway, storm drainage, increased traffic, natural resources and architectural design. She stated that two additional meetings were held on January 10 and 16, to discuss the realignment and PACE. She stated the meeting summary was included in the packets. She pointed out that the realignment of Fossil Creek Parkway was a separate issue from the PACE development, although the development provides the City with an opportunity to realign the street. Staff believed the project meets city criteria and recommended approval with conditions. Member Groznik asked for clarification on the Point Chart D, for this project of 2 plus acres. Ms. Ripley replied that the point chart scores only 0 or 6, no in between scoring allowed. Member Groznik noted that the applicant received points for joint parking. He asked with whom they will be sharing the parking. 0 0 • P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 7 Ms. Ripley stated that the preliminary plan showed a future connection to the north, so when that area was developed, parking would be shared. Member Walker asked if there was a potential for a road cut through the wetlands to the north for parking. Ms. Ripley replied yes. Member Shepard asked the location of the erosion control structures referred to in the conditions. Ms. Ripley stated that they were drop structures in Fossil Creek itself. Member Shepard asked if the condition implies that the structures would be built with this development or sometime in the future. Ms. Ripley stated that at the present time, staff's estimate was that they be constructed at preliminary, however condition "B" states that the developer must update erosion studies to ascertain whether erosion control measures are appropriate and then at that time determine what was necessary. Member Edwards asked why, if staff determined that the facility was in a regional community shopping district, an auto -related point chart was used. Ms. Ripley the auto related specifically stated, "warehouse uses" in its definition and staff believed it was the appropriate chart to use in the project evaluation. Member Edwards believed that although "warehouse" was in the PACE name, the facility would not operate as a warehouse. He asked how staff arrived at that definition. Ms. Ripley stated that auto -related defined the uses as being free standing department stores, as well as warehouses, and this fit the project. She said the applicant filled out a business service point chart and scored higher on a business service point chart than on the auto related chart. She said the project did not take access directly from College Ave., as the curb cut will serve more than PACE. Member Edwards stated that if the recirculation road was not connected north or south, then the main access was off of College Ave. Ms. Ripley replied that it was true, but staff examined the long range develop- ment potential and the recirculation road. Michael L. Griffith, Attorney for Fossil Creek Meadows Homeowners' Associa- tion, stated that the homeowners weren't opposed to development but were concerned about the quality of development. He asked that the Board look at the LDGS and guidelines carefully. He believed Member Edwards's questions on the point chart were important. He stated the access was off College and said that at the neighborhood meeting, they were told that the recirculation road may never be developed. He noted that the PACE signage was placed on P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 8 College Ave., and indicated that he perceived the primary access to be College Avenue. He related concerns regarding runoff from the parking areas and roof and does not believe they have been addressed adequately. He also had a concern on the stop sign and the collection of pollution in the basin. He stated that if the project had impact in the County, then the City had to make certain improvements and he knew of no such contact between the County and City. Rod Van Velsen, President of the Fossil Creek Meadows H.O.A., reviewed his concerns. They regarded storm drainage, wetlands mitigation, architectural compatibility, and increased traffic. He stated that there some residents from Fossil Creek who would like to speak on specific issues. Dr. Michael Harvey, a member of various national committees, pointed out the importance of the topography in relation to the groundwater. He believed there might be increased sedimentation and wished there were more facts and information available showing the effects of runoff on the stability of the creek. He stated the drop structures built up stream from the point of discharge would not have any effect downstream and further development may increase damage to the creek. He also felt that pollutants from the parking lot run off would collect in the sediment and find their way into the creek. He hoped that the applicants find out information first and build the structures, rather than build first and deal with problems afterward. Dr. Del Nimmo, stated he has worked with the EPA and has been with the National Park Service for 16 years. He stated that American wetlands were disappearing. He believed the wetlands impacted by the development exceeded one acre. A study supervised by Dr. Alex Cringan for the Fossil Creek Mead- ows H.O.A. was done for the residents and it stated the creek supplied aquatic food for 24 species of birds. A study done by National Urban Runoff Pro- gram, listed .pollutants found in water samples. The list contained lead, zinc, copper, chromium, and arsenic. He noted from the report entitled, Water Quality in the Nation's River, stated there was an increase of salt in the nation's rivers and questioned the amount of salt to be used to de-ice the parking lot at the PACE site. At this time, Chairwoman O'Dell told the audience that due to the length of the meeting, the remaining items would be heard next Monday, January 30, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Craig Mulford, Boulder Associates in Architecture, thought that although the project had some merit, he would like the applicant to work with the neighbor- hood in regard to scale, mass and materials. He stated that all areas were not developable and this may be one of them. He pointed out that to fit this large building into the site, the land must be altered. He stated the develop- ment was not sensitive to the site and did not contribute in a positive way. Deb Moyer, a County resident, felt the stop light at the base of the hill will keep car pollution in the basin. She stated the residents felt the realignment of Fossil Creek Parkway and the PACE project to be associated. She said that at the time Werner School came in, the City determined that the area was unacceptable for a stop light, and she wondered why that area was now P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 9 thought acceptable. She believed this project might contribute economically, but noted there were other locations. Wayne Anderson stated he owned property 600' west of the PACE site and wished to see adequate screening between the properties. He asked the relation- ship to PACE and the railroad. He voiced concerns about site lights and the possibility of a railroad spur for PACE deliveries. Mr. Vaught stated there would be no railroad spur. Bill Alexander, a geologist, said he visited the site and stated there were fossils. He stated there was once a shallow sea on the site. It contained marine life, hence the fossils. He believed this may be the most unique feature along College Avenue. He thought a nature trail would be appropriate for the Fort Collins area. He believed that the construction of the frontage road would require a bridge and that this would be expensive. Harold Swope, President Fairway Estates H.O.A., pointed out the current and future developments and the cumulative effects of traffic impact. He asked the Board to halt developments along College, such as the one done at the Wal-Mart site. Wes Nelson, a County resident, stated the area was not suitable for develop- ment. He said there were areas, including the PACE site, which had been designated by the City to be open spaces. Randy Hamill, resident, asked about the impact of property values. He believes that discount stores would cheapen the area. Bob Kopitzki, believed some of the revenue from PACE will be from customers taken away from K-Mart and Target. He had concerns about traffic impacts and creek runoff. Bob Lorigan, resident, had a concern about the pollutants in the area caused by the project's runoff. Rick Ensdorff, City Traffic Engineer, stated the traffic light location was desirable as additional development warranted. He said that during icy periods, the College Ave. light would remain flashing yellow, while the side street lights would be flashing red. He pointed out that the placement of signals would raise the priority of the area with the sand and plow crews. He stated the City Master Street Plan, adopted by Council in 1981, identified the need for a low intensity arterial street between Harmony Road and Trilby. Chairwoman O'Dell asked if the re -alignment of Fossil Creek Parkway was triggered by the PACE development. Mr. Ensdorff stated the realignment was brought about due to the lack of signalization on that portion of S. College and was in conjunction with the South College Access Plan. He stated that he and the applicant have worked together and have established a need for the arterial but he noted there were 0 options in the design P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 10 Member Groznik asked if the street will resemble the Lemay extension from Horsetooth to Harmony. Mr. Ensdorff believed that to be a close comparison, although the raised median was not the standard design. Member Shepard asked if the re -alignment had an impact to the bridge to the east. Glenn Schleuter, Storm Water Utilities, replied that the preliminary data indicated there would be no effect. Mike Herzig, Development Coordinator, stated the street design would not affect the bridge at this time. Mr. Peterson stated that the City met with the County Engineers on the whole development, specifically, the re -alignment of Fossil Creek Parkway and the effect on drop structures. The County indicated that they had no immediate plans for action. Member Edwards asked if Mr. Ensdorff felt comfortable with the scope of study done in traffic analysis, as it did not take into account the interplay of Target and other regional community shopping centers, which he believed this project to be. He asked about the possibilities of frequent stops during shopping trips along College Avenue. Mr. Ensdorff stated the study did not include the numbers of trips generated by a vehicle which stopped at all community regional shopping centers along College Ave. He was confident that the traffic study examined the project in a community wide nature with the appropriate traffic projections. He stated the project adhered to the traffic study done in with the West Fossil Creek Master Plan. Member Edwards asked if any studies had been done both for short and long term. Mr. Ensdorff said that all traffic studies include both. He said that while it looked at the current level of service, the study also examined future develop- ment. He believed the recirculation road would eventually provide an impor- tant access point for that part of the City. Member Groznik asked if there were any current mitigation areas, such as the one at PACE, which has received urban runoff and what the quality of wild- life and condition of the area was. Bob Wilkinson, City Natural Resources, stated there was nothing in the immedi- ate area. He said that this type of process was being done in Denver. Chairwoman O'Dell recalled Dr. Harvey's remark regarding sediment compaction and asked for input. P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page I Mr. Wilkinson stated that the water table east of the railroad tracks was very low, which would increase the rate of permeability. He said they did not know the consequences and agreed with Dr. Harvey that more information was required. Member Groznik asked staff's position in regard to the erosion of Fossil Creek due to more water and what in the study done by Simons and Leigh would mitigate this. Mr. Schleutcr stated that the drop structures were initiated by the Simons and Lee Report. He noted that a further report was required as a condition of approval. Chairwoman O'Dell asked Mr. Vaught what will be visible on the roof of the PACE structure. Mr. Vaught stated 10 rooftop units which, although there was a parapet, could be visible. He said that the two closest to the east wall would be set back 60' and painted to match the roof. Chairwoman O'Dell asked how many delivery trucks per day were anticipated. Mr. Vaught said the PACE people estimated 15 to 20 trucks per day, spaced over a 24 hour period. Member Edwards asked if the size of the proposed building was comparable to The Square. Mr. Vaught replied yes. He said they were trying to achieve 4.5 - 5 cars per thousand square feet, which was the number used at the Foothills Mall. He stated that the applicants believed that there were no neighborhood compatibil- ity issues as they were not adjacent to residential areas. Member Groznik asked for more information in regards to the size, scale and color. He also asked about the use of salt on the parking lots and why the entrance was not on the east or south side of the building. Mr. Vaught replied that during the design stage, the applicant wanted the bulk of the parking on the north side to take advantage of the natural screening with the design of the sloping roof from the north to the south for runoff purposes. He stated that the design and impact was a fairly fixed footprint. The loading was located on the west side to utilize screen. He felt this site plan offered more positive potential, with the most negative being the north side entrance. He stated he did not have information from PACE as to snow removal and was sure there was other methods besides salting. Member Groznik stated he saw a PACE in California with different lines and felt more could be done with this plan. He asked why the floor elevation could not have been lowered. 0 P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 12 Mr. Vaught stated that the lower they made the floor elevation, the higher the western retaining wall became. After looking at two building elevations, this one was thought to have the least impact. The design will work well with the pad to the south, recirculation of the road and the mitigation and drainage area currently was on the north side. Member Groznik asked if the drainage channel will be piped. Mr. Vaught replied no, they want to keep it as surface waterway as it does carry water. They had originally shown grays as the building colors and the neighborhood had suggested natural browns, which they did not object to. Member Groznik asked staff if the lettering on the building was being reviewed as signage. Ms. Ripley replied yes, it was a sign which would adhere to the sign code. Staff asked for more information which will be reviewed with the final plan. Mr. Vaught stated the signage at the entryway on College Avenue and Fossil Creek Parkway was not just PACE signage. This sign would list six or seven tenant names. Member Kern asked what the noise levels are of the roof units. Mr. Vaught replied that he had no information available but could get that information. He believed the noise would be lowered during the night. Chairwoman O'Dell asked how the applicants arrived at this site with all the design and mitigation problems. Mr. Vaught responded that PACE surveyed the area and felt this site met their needs of being near a major intersection and the property price. Chairwoman O'Dell asked if the applicant wanted the site near the Harmony intersection even though PACE was a trip -specific business. Mr. Vaught stated that yes, this was what the applicant wanted. Member Walker stated that after visiting the site, he agreed that this was a special site. He stated that by putting such a large building on this site, it was determined how the rest of the land would be developed. The Cameron Park area has smaller buildings, which make it easier to work with topography. He stated that he could not answer favorably to all the criteria. Member Walker moved to deny the project based on three criteria items that he could not answer yes to in regards to this site. Those criteria were: 1) Item 12, which asked that if the project contained known areas of natural or geological hazard, will special engineering cautions be taken to overcome these limitations. Member Walker felt that they were basically striking out into unknown realms of this technology; 2) Item 28 asked If the design arrangements of elements on the site were to favorable relationship with the existing natural topography. He P & Z Meeting - January 27, 1989 Page 13 felt that this diverse site had been leveled; and 3) Item 33 asked if the site design and arrangement of buildings and open space contributed to the overall aesthetic quality of a site configuration. Again, he felt that this site had been leveled. Member Groznik seconded the motion by stating he felt the development was insensitive to the site and violated valuable principles to the site design. He felt the site was developable but smaller scale should be used and the mitiga- tion measures were questionable. Member Kern commented that he felt there were too many conditions placed on this preliminary plan. He felt there was an inappropriate evaluation of Fossil Creek Boulevard and College Avenue with this plan. He felt a regional community shopping center would be more appropriate for this site. Member Edwards commented that he would be afraid that if the project was denied, the Board would have sent a signal that this property was undevelop- able. He commented that by approving this with a long list of conditions would also send the wrong message. He believed that by approving this as a preliminary plan, it would create a level of expectations. He had serious concerns that any conditions placed on the preliminary plan could be resolved at the time of final. He stated he would like to defer voting on this project, so he would vote against this project. Member Klataske believed the site could be developed but was not sure it should be developed with a project of this scope. He stated he would like to have seen the project tabled for further study. He stated he would support the motion to deny. Member Shepard would not support the motion to deny. She believed the con- ditions could be resolved at final and that the applicant should have the opportunity to address the conditions. She was comfortable with the Corps of Engineers determination and action regarding wetlands. She pointed out that there are other developments, such as the Mall, whose primary access traffic was from College Avenue but have alternate access points. She said that the short and long term planning of the collector street had been seen before. She stated she would like to see the city work with the wetlands mitigation program. Chairwoman O'Dell stated that when the site was approved as a master plan, it was seen as a developable site. She did not believe this project to be compatible with the existing topography, so would vote in support of the motion. Member Groznik stated that the applicant could come back with a revised site plan for review. He believed if they are to set a precedent on the wetlands mitigation, he would rather see a 2-1 or 3-1 wetlands replacement rather than 1-1. Member Walker wished to clarify his motion and stated that he was not saying no to PACE itself, but he believed the location was not suitable due to the 40 special care needed at this site. P & Z Mecting - January 27, 1989 Page 14 Member Burns stated he had concerns regarding storm drainage, as presented but believed it could be worked out. He thought that dealing with storm drainage waste using aquatic habitat was new and might better be used in a different location. He also believed the site plan did not fit the topography. The motion to deny the project passed 5-2, with Members Shepard and Edwards voting against. Meeting adjourned at 11:10 p.m.