Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 07/13/19870 SPECIAL SESSION PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD July 13, 1987 Meeting Minutes The special session meeting of the Planning and zoning Board was called to order at 6.38 p.m, in the CDBG Conference Rocm, 200 West Mountain Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado, Board members present at the July 13 special session meeting included Don Crews, Dave Edwards, Laurie O'Dell, Bernie Strom, and Jim Klataske. Sandy Kern, Sharon Brawn, and Linda Lang were absent from the meeting. Staff members present were Tan Peterson, Ted Shepard, Jim Newell, Glen Schluter, and Renee Joseph. Legal representative was Paul Eckman. The meeting consisted of the discussion of. The English Ranch at Spring Creek Farms, First Filing - Final Subdivision. The item was continued fran the June 22, 1987 meeting. Ted Shepard gave a description of the project. The applicant, Bill Bartran, referred to the areas of conflict that were . not in the utility agreement. He stated the letter the Board members received addressed items discussed at the staff. meetings. Member Edwards inquired if the Board could take the time to review the let- ter, submitted by Bill Bartran at 4:30 p.m. on 7/13/87, before further dis- cussion of the items. Ted Shepard indicated the staff memo stated the results of. the June 30, 1987 meeting. He commented the areas of disagreement were (1) cost of tieing into the existing sanitary sewer system in Horsetooth Road, and (2) the design of Kingsley Drive. He stated in Horsetooth Road the existing sanitary sewer trunk line and the storm drainage line are parallel. He indicated the cost of tieing into these two lines will be increased by the necessity of a siphon. He commented the developer wants the City to pay for the increased cost. Ted explained the City is unwilling to do this, and believes the cost is a part of the overall expense of developing the property which the City should not subsidize. He stated Kingsley Drive would be a collector street. He said the City approved design of a collec- tors includes a sidewalk detached from the curb with landscaping by the adjacent property owners. Ted indicated the unresolved issues also include the storm drainage design in future filings, (Comment 4, page 3 - Staff Memo). Chairman Crews inquired about the second issue, regarding the repay agree- ments out of the City's Street Oversizing Fund. Mr. Pckman commented it is a restatement of the City Charter. Ile stated . the agreement is not void and the City Council can make appropriations. Special Session P & Z N Ang - July 13, 1987 English Ranch at Horsetooth Cannons Page 2 Jim Newell stated the developer was aware of the status of the fund. Chairman Crews inquired about item 3, regarding the City's position on pay- ing overhead and administrative costs as part of the repay agreement. Jim Newell stated the point had been brought up by the developer. He indi- cated the repayment agreements would include the administrative cost. Member O'Dell asked if Fox Meadows had the same problem with tieing into the existing sewer and storm drainage in Horsetooth. Jim Newell stated they did not. He indicated Fox Meadows had several options and the sanitary sewer in Horsetooth Road is East of Fox Meadows. Member O'Dell inquired if there were any other variations to the street design. She asked if there were any streets attaching to Sunstone. Ted Shepard stated Bison Road attached to Fox Meadows and Bison would also attach to Kingsley at a four-way stop, but this is in future filings. Chairman Crews referred to the attorney's letter from the applicant. He asked if the curb and sidewalk development would be single pour of con- crete. He inquired if there would be a variance. Ted Shepard stated Caribou had been built according to the old standards and that a variance would be required under current standards. Member Klataske inquired if parking would be allowed on the street. Jim Newell indicated parking would be allowed as shown in the typical X-section. Member Klataske asked if off-street parking would be available during the development. Jim Newell .stated no. If the street became intensely used, then it would become a two lane with no parking. M,mher O'Dell askal if other strool.n conrw,:tirxl Fox Meadows ami lhie devel- opment currently have attached walks. Jim Newell stated staff had worked out the main details over the past two months, but these items are still unresolved. Member Edwards inquired if the Homeowner's Association would be responsible for the maintenance. Jim Newell indicated the green space would be maintained by the individual property owners; there is no Homeowner's Association with this subdivision. Member Strom stated the street is a standard design. He inquired why the applicant wanted a waiver from the standard. He asked what makes the Special Session P &meeting - July 13, 1987 • English Ranch at Horsetooth Crrmons Page 3 • applicant's property different from others. Hill Bartran amnented the letter was self-explanatory. Member Strom wanted the applicant to justify the waiver. He inquired if there was something unusual about the property. Bill Bartran stated the property is not different. He felt the standard is incorrect. Member Stran indicated the applicant should approach the problem by taking measures to change the standard, not by getting a waiver. Chairman Crews agreed with Member Strap. He indicated he is aware of the poor maintenance of the green space between the sidewalks and curbs, as well as between the sidewalks and back fences. He stated if Bill Bartran wants this sidewalk attached to the curb, he should request a waiver. Member Strap stated he understands both sides of the conflict. He com- mented he does not see any justification for waiving the standard. Member Edwards inquired if the adjoining Sunstone development was approved prior to the standard. Jim Newell stated Sunstone was approved after the City Council adopted the . current street standards. Sane variances have been granted in the past for other developments when justified. Mr. Eckman inquired if there were any provisions in the design directory for streets for the granting of variances. Jim Newell indicated there are some provisions if a formal request is sub- mitted and if it is approved by the Engineering Department we can act on that as a variance. Tom Peterson stated the Planning and Zoning Board is the court of last resort in those variances under its powers. He indicated it is very rare the P&Z Board get this type of request. Mr. Eckman stated he was concerned that the P&Z Board is being asked to vary technical standards. He indicated the design criteria of streets is referenced in the subdivision ordinance and the P&Z Board can vary provi- sions of this ordinance. Ted Shepard indicated between June 22, 1987 and this meeting countless meetings were held to try and resolve these issues. He stated no resolu- tion cane about. Member Strap inquired if all the issues in the letter were still in dis- agreement. • Ted Shepard stated the sewer siphon, streets, and now sane of the storm drainage are issues still unresolved. Special Session P & Z M _ing - July 13, 1987. English Ranch at Horsetooth Cannons Page 4 Member Strom inquired about the status of these issues. Tan Peterson indicated the street issue is a design argument that gets worked out in the engineering. He stated the City feels it is not respon- sible to pay for this area; it is the applicant's responsibility. Jim Newell informed there are a few other issues dealing with the water and sewer utility. He stated the City will not subsidize the cost of develop- ing property in the City limits. Mr. Eckman stated the City might have imposed a greater expense on the ear- lier developer requiring him to bury the line deeper. He indicated the sewer line is not planning item and the Water Utility will not be bound by the Board's decision. Jim Newell indicated the developer has the option of tieing into the exist- ing sewer line and avoid a repayment on this line. Member Edwards inquired what the Board is faced with at this point. He stated the Board has an application based on certain terms and conditions. He informed the application has been recommended for denial by the staff because certain criteria has not been met. He stated the Board has a deci- sion to approve staff's recommendation of denial or approve the application as a final with a multitude of conditions. Mr. Eckman informed the code permits to approve, deny, or approve with con- ditions the application. He indicated the Board may want to make recom- mendations on these issues that are not planning issues. Member O'Dell inquired if the Board approved the application what exactly is being approved. Mr. Eckman stated approval would be according to the way the applicant wants it. Mr. Eckman indicated some of the issues should go to other departments. He stated the storm drainage issue would be reviewed by the Storm Drainage Board. Member Edwards asked if approval of the development could be made without the approval of the applicant. He inquired if the City would be imposing on the applicant. Jim Newell stated more issues would have to be worked out even with approval by the Board. Member Strom indicated the Board may not be in a position to approve the project at this time. Tan Peterson stated other departments are involved in the process. Chairman Crews indicated the Board can not commit the water and sewer Special Session P & Meeting - July 13, 1987 • English Ranch at lorsetooth Commons Page 5 • department to pay for the siphon if they are unwilling. Member Edwards stated the letter from the applicant included issues that may or may not be resolved. He indicated the elements do not meet the City's criteria or are to be resolved by other bodies. Mr. Eckman stated the storm drainage issue was thought as being resolved because the City's and applicant's engineers had taken the position that the historic flaws had not changed in any manner to hurt the applicant. He indicated there had been a question about indemnification and that the City had directed the applicant to run the water in the streets. He informed the development agreement provides the developer has to indemnify the City from any damages on dawn stream property caused by a change in the historic flaw of water off of the property being developed. He stated this language was included in the development agreement because of a lawsuit the City of Broomfield was involved in; Broomfield lost the case. He informed the Supreme Court stated Brownfield was a trespasser along with the developer on the down stream farmer. He stated three exemptions from the developer indemnification: (1) any flaws in the master plan the developer will not be responsible for, (2) developer will not be responsible to indemnify the City for any directives the City has given to the developer in designing a storm drainage, and (3) maintenance. Staff thought they had solved the problem indicated in (2). Jim Newell stated staff had resolved the maintenance issue. He commented . the frontage along Horsetooth Road is mostly a storm water detention pond, which is to be maintained by the City. He stated staff has worked cut a landscaping design that would enhance the appearance of the subdivision in conjunction with the developer. He indicated the City would not be respon- sible for maintaining the signage because it does not benefit the public good. Mr. Eckman stated with respect to the storm drainage language and the indemnification, if the applicant wishes the Board to advise as to whether to have the language in the development agreement or not he would agree to this. He indicated varying the ordinance could also be done with the street issue. He stated the storm drainage is a utility issue. He indi- cated future filings has been solved. Glen Johnson commented he is a managing partner of Spring Creek Farms. He indicated he is concerned with the storm drainage issue and was glad to hear the developer had been indemnified of any problems. He stated his biggest concern dealt with the streets; the curbs, and gutters on the col- lector street being separate. He felt water will he wasted on the side- walks because of the separation of the walk and curb. He indicated the subdivision in Fox Meadows had received a variance for the sidewalk and curb. He inquired why the property in question had not received the same consideration. He discussed that the sanitary sewer system on the property had been originally put in too shallow requiring an added fill of three feet later on. He stated he did not agree with the planning of the pro- ject. . Member Edwards inquired about the neighboring property. Special Session P & Z M _ing - July 13, 1987 English Ranch at Horsetooth Commons Page 6 Glen Johnson stated he and his brother own one half. of Section 32, part of the lard in question. Bill Bartran commented the letter he submitted was important to review in regards to the issues. He explained his concerns on behalf of his custom- ers. Ile stated it is unsatisfactory to have the spill way out of the Sun - stone detention pond dumping on the English Ranch subdivision. He indi- cated his customers would be subjected to an overflow structure. He felt the storm drainage would affect the marketability of the lots below the spill way. fie stated he can not honestly represent the property to future customers. Member Stone inquired what the problems were with the storm drainage. Mr. Schluter indicated on the map the Sunstone detention pond. He shaved where the spill way was located. He discussed the easement, similar to a sidewalk, that would go around a section of the property. Member o'Do-Al inquired where the future detention pond w-ul.d he in relation to the spill way on the English Ranch subdivision. Jim Newell commented different designs were created of the spillway. He indicated the spill way would be paid for by the Storm Water Utility because it is a regional facility. Member O'Dell asked if the spillway Bill Bartran discussed was on the map. Bill Bartran stated it is a future problem and the spillway had not been designed yet. Jim Newell stated the property east of Sunstone is on the master drainage plan to carry this water. It is a regional facility located in the nor- theastern corner of Sunstone Village PUD. He indicated there will be regional run off going either around the perimeter of the English Ranch property or through the property in a spillway. He stated the water would have to be accommodated for in the design of the property. He stated the City is not committed to either of the designs of the drainage plan. Mr. Schluter stated the developer of Sunstone built the detention pond larger giving the City flexibility to discharge less water. Member Strom inquired if Bill Bartran is arguing that the drainage plan should be done according to the master drainage plan. Bill Bartran stated the project had been submitted both ways at this time. He indicated the preliminary had been submitted with the channel and aban- doned with the channel for the final. Member Strap inquired what would be acceptable to Bill Bartran's customers. Bill Bartran indicated the original plan was better for his customers with the 40 ft. easement channel a some maintenance agreement. Special Session P & Z Meeting - July 13, 1987 Enxll ish Ranch at- Ilorsetooth Commons Dade 7 0 Mr. Schluter stated the elevation is almost the same in the area. He indi- cated the spillway would only be the length of one lot, similar to a walk- way. Member O'Dell inquired if the spillway would go into a cul-de-sac street. Mr. Eckman stated in regard to the indemnification, the passage of water would be an order of the City. Bill Bartran agreed with Mr. Eckman's statement since the plan would meet with the marketability of the structure. Mr. Eckman asked if this would eliminate Mr. Johnson's concern about the indemnification. Bill Bartran replied yes, but it would not meet his concern about the mar- ketability. Member Strom inquired if he was wrong in thinking if the City went back to the original plan there would not be a final plan at this time. He asked if staff's recommendation resulted because the other way is more expensive. Tan Peterson indicated yes because the City would have a longer term . maintenance commitment. Jim Newell stated the City would purchase and pay the developer for exca- vating the dirt out of the easement and maintain it. Member Strom asked if the developer wanted to do it the other way would he be willing to pay for the expense. Bill Bartran stated no; it is a basin expense, not a subdivision cost. Member Strom inquired if the Board was in any position to approve anything at this point. Ton Peterson stated no. He commented that is why staff is recommending denial of the project. Member Edwards moved to deny the application based upon the staff's recom- mendation due to the unresolved issues of the storm drainage and street standards. Chairman Crews stated it would be a mistake to become engineers over the issue. Member Strom seconded. Motion to deny carried 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 7:59 p.m. Y+� d COUNTRY ems' • ......... .� WILLOXI . . ''< � Imo.;.;. •.: :��. , RETIRHIM LIIIIIIIIIIIM Tpwvrvr oe �.: hr..........::. - -- is ... ....• N •'/•• : AiU4 ••••R�/:•�• HIGHWAY 14 l 'S ::: :'e:...:::: : C rht PR0.SPFXT/OVHtLADID ' ��CEIARL�SRC7N ..... ... �s� 4..;.:.:. r ti. 'J +vt..:•; AMANM TEC NCXOGY ? FOOTHILLS •.'.\.ice i+l.'��. '.��i .•j � OVERLAND HILLS .... ...•. a� =•r•.•.•.'. '• :.•.•.•.•. .•1r.1.• _ 1 . TRILBY RD. CO. .RRD�.3r...C.'.•.' ':. �'• i_ .....' CITY OF FORT COLLINS OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE June 25, 1987 CONTINUATION OF JUNE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD HEARING The continued Planning and Zoning Board hearing for June will be held on July 13, 1987 at 6:30 p.m. in the CDBG Conference Room, located at 200 West Mountain Avenue. The purpose of this meeting is to review questions con- cerning The English Ranch Final - First Filing. This meetin4 is open to the public. Contact: Tom Peterson Planning Department 221-6750 OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, PLANNING 300 LaPorte Ave. • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, Colorado 80522 • (303) 221-6750