Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 04/28/1986• PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES April 28, 1986 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board was called to order at 6:34 p.m. in the Council Chambers, New City Hall. Board members present included Tim Dow, Dave Edwards, Sanford Kern, Laurie O'Dell, Don Crews, Sharon Brown and Alternate Bernie Strom. Planning Staff members present included Joe Frank, Steve Ryder, Elaine Kleckner, Jan Shepard, Bonnie Tripoli, Matt Baker, Sherry Albertson -Clark, Bob Wilkinson and Kayla Ballard. Legal staff was represented by Steve Roy. Joe Frank gave the agenda review. He stated that Item 2, N71-84A Alta Vista Subdivision Third Filing, Preliminary and Final and Item 12, N37-84B Lakewood Estates PUD, Preliminary, has been continued to the May meeting. Mr. Frank then proceeded to review the Consent Agenda which consisted of the following: /54-83C Fort Collins Retirement Residence/Nazarene Church PUD - Final; /46-85A Opera House Block Partnership PUD - Final; #14-84 1209 North College Avenue PUD - One Year Extension; #27-86 Soldier Canyon Filter Plant - Special Review County Referral; /11-858 Stute #3 Amended - Annexa- tion; and /11-85C Stute N3 Amended - Zoning. Member Edwards requested that Item 3, /54-83C Fort Collins Retirement Residence/Nazarene Church PUD - Final be pulled for discussion. Member Brown moved to approve Consent Agenda Items 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. Member Crews seconded. Motion to approve passed 7-0. /54-83C FORT COLLINS RETIREMENT RESIDENCE/NAZARENE CHURCH PUD - FINAL Steve Ryder gave a description of the property. Jim Cox, Architecture Plus, gave a brief description of the proposed pro- ject. Member Edwards questioned the impact on Lemay Avenue regarding the ingress/egress of traffic during heavy use. Mr. Cox replied that the heavy usage of the church is on Sundays, however, there is approximately 200 women that use the facility on Tuesday mornings. There has been studies done regarding an appropriate location for a point of access to the site. The parking will be expanded to 226 spaces which is greater than city requirements. They are also discouraging street parking to the north of the church. Planning and Zoning Boar linutes April 28, 1986 Page 2 Member Edwards stated he understood why the parking is to the south but was more concerned about the traffic impact on Lemay Avenue when someone is turning north from the retirement center while someone else is turning south from Kirkwood. He was also concerned about future ditch improvements and the impacts of these improvements on the traffic. Stan Meyers, RBD Engineering, stated the irrigation ditch in front of Kirk- wood could be bridged but this would create an infeasible slope. There would also be a problem with the drop-off area interfering with the decel- eration lane. Southbound Lemay traffic would not conflict with people turn- ing into northbound Lemay Avenue traffic. Rick Ensdorff, City Traffic Engineer, stated the best solution was to move the curbcut to the south and have a deceleration lane turning north. Member Strom asked if, given the fact that Lemay is a heavy traffic car- rier, congestion could be reduced if access were provided on Columbia Road. Mr. Ensdorff replied that this was discussed in the preliminary stage and was the original recommendation from the traffic department. After discuss- ing with residents in the area, the point of access was re -analyzed and the judgement was made that site could handle access from only Lemay Avenue. Mr. Ryder gave the staff report recommending approval. The three conditions of preliminary approval which have been met by the applicant. George Betz, 1101 Kirkwood, stated he is in favor of the project but still had concerns regarding the Lemay access. He felt that access from Columbia Road would be more appropriate. Member Brown asked if the residents of the retirement center would drive their own vehicles. Clifford Currey, architect for the retirement center, replied that about 10% of the residents would have their own vehicles. There will be a van to take the residents to doctor appointments, etc. Personal vehicle trips would be very rare. Member Edwards stated that the land use is very appropriate for this pro- ject but had a concern that the relocation of the ingress/egress point is different than proposed at the preliminary. He stated that this project would have a heavy traffic use daily. He added that the access should be on Columbia Road. Member Crews moved to approve Fort Collins Retirement Residence/Nazarene Church Final. Member O'Dell seconded. Motion to approve passed 6-1 with Member Edwards voting no. Planning and Zonin and Minutes • April 28, 1986 Page 3 /11-86A COLLINDALE '85 PUB - FINAL Elaine Kleckner gave a description of the property. Bill Brenner, Robb and Brenner and Bill Bartran representative, stated that the landscape problems have been resolved. He commented that it is logical that the residents heading south may shortcut through Preston Trail and that there is nothing to gain by going in a circuitous route. He added that the residents suggested moving the entrance off of Preston Trail and align it with a future access elsewhere. Moving this approximately 200 feet will not discourage people from taking the shortcut. The parking was moved back 5 feet to provide additional landscaping. Ms. Kleckner gave the staff report recommending conditional approval. She stated that the storm drainage was better addressed in that the culvert design was improved. This was one of the conditions of approval. The devel- oper should design the culvert under Horsetooth Road in a manner acceptable to the City and obtain approval of the off -site improvements from the City if necessary within 30 days. Another condition of the approval is that signatures on the revised final development agreement are needed within 30 days of Planning and Zoning Board approval. Chairman Dow asked if the culvert and drainage problem should be addressed by administrative change or needs to be a part of final approval. Ms. Kleckner replied that the changes should occur on the final utility plans. If the Board puts conditions on final approval, staff would make sure that the design is acceptable. The applicant is aware and agrees to this condition. Chairman Dow asked what improvements would be made on Horsetooth Road as part of this PUB. Ms. Kleckner replied that improvements would be done adjacent to Horsetooth Road back to Lochwood Drive. This would include the north side of Horse - tooth Road, in front of the project. Mr. Ensdorff summarized the traffic report. He stated there was a traffic volume of 440 trips in a 24 hour period. This is not uncommon. There was mechanical counts and visual counts. It was found that Preston Trail was used as a pass -through with destinations north of the area. The traffic department is proposing that stop signs be installed at Preston Trail, Carlton, Lochwood and Preston Trail. Also, speed limit signs should be installed on Preston Trail. The difficulty is to prevent people from using Preston Trail as a pass -through. Planning and Zoning Boar 'inutes April 28, 1986 Page 4 Jim Martell, representative of 17 of 18 home owners on Preston Trail, stated it is difficult to predict which route a driver will take. In this case, Preston Trail is the most convenient route. He stated that other possibilities are to provide direct access onto Horsetooth Road which could maximize convenience of using Horsetooth Road; move this access further to the south and leave it on Carlton Road; move street further to the north and align with Quail Hollow Drive which would make the route less circuit- ous. Sue Carebench, 1601 Preston Trail, stated that people from the proposed area will come down Preston Trail to get to the pool and proposed conve- nient store. She believed the stop signs will not be beneficial and people should know the speed limit in a residential area. She stated she felt there would be problems concerning the children's safety on this block. Jackie Neesan, 1542 Preston Trail, asked why an access road was allowed on Lemay Avenue but not on Horsetooth Road for this project. Casey Cornell, 1554 Preston Trail, stated that the existing problem, of speeding needs to be corrected. Stu McPherson, Waterford Lane resident, questioned where the location of the single family homes will be and if they will have access to Carlton Drive. He suggested that a lone access from Horsetooth Road be installed onto Carlton Drive. Bill Hutton, Collindale/Carlton resident, commented that he has changed his route because of the danger of the intersection of Horsetooth and Carl- ton. He felt that Horsetooth is dangerous where it goes from 2 lanes to one with no reflectors. Chairman Dow stated that the developer will improve the north side lanes of Horsetooth to Lochwood and increased to four lanes. The south side will be improved as the City funds become available. Albert Curtis, 1554 Quail Hollow, stated he was concerned about the street improvements along Horsetooth at Carlton and about the ditch needing to be improved. Bill Bartran, applicant, stated the improvements on Horsetooth have been needed and he has done everything possible to improve it. He stated he will improve the north half of Horsetooth to Lochwood Drive completely. He is not building on Waterford Lane so the traffic there is not related to him. The condos will be 1 and 2 bedroom units. The convenient store at Lochwood and Horsetooth will have an access onto Carlton, however, this plan is not far enough along to say for sure what the street plan will be. There is a Planning and ZoninOard Minutes • April 28, 1986 Page 5 greenbelt at the end of Quail Hollow which is designed specifically for walking traffic to the pool. This will tie up to another greenbelt at Carl- ton on the west. There is a speeding problem but the traffic volume of 440 per day is acceptable. He added that the engineering plans for improve- ments of the railroad crossing will remove the bumps and will meet city standards. Member Kern asked if there could be a street built from Lochwood in a southerly direction east of the pool. Mr. Bartran replied that this has not been studied enough but the City does not permit any left turns going east into the north lane. Member Brown stated she was concerned about the hazardous waste materials site that NCR uses in their operation. She asked what the risks are for the surrounding areas and what is the ground zero. Warren Jones, Poudre Fire Authority, replied that there is quite a bit of distance between the plant and the waste site. In this case, it is diffi- cult to arrive at a ground zero situation. In the worst case situation, the surrounding areas could be affected but there are also natural phenomenon that affect the area. The facility has been reviewed by the Fire Authority, which includes their compliance with national and local ordinances, site design, history of incidences and the fire authority's response time and procedures. A recommendation can not be made at this time but this project would not be in any greater danger than the surrounding areas. The fire authority is trying to address this issue on a community -wide basis. In the future they will have planning tools to address these issues. There is a lot of work going on involving expansion of Uniform Fire Code with heavy concentration of input from semi -conductor industry. There is no clear policy that says "in the event of this level of emergency" what exactly will be done. However, the Fire Authority does have a very sophisticated response system for hazardous materials, as does NCR. There are too many variables involved to come up with a set plan. Mr. Ensdorff briefly discussed street improvements on Horsetooth which will provide better accessways, will have widening with curb returns on the north side of the street for easier in and out turns, and will have a left turn bay eastbound to northbound on Carlton and Lochwood. The stop signs and speed limit signs are not a solution but an attempt to help the exist- ing situation. The speeding and pass -through issues are not isolated to this area. These problems exist throughout the community. Member Kern moved to approve Collindale '85 PUD - Final with the following conditions outlined by staff: 1)the developer design the culvert near Horsetooth Road in a manner that is acceptable to City staff and obtain approval from City staff for doing off -site improvements as necessary, and 2)that the development agreement be executed within 30 days of the Planning and Zoning Board approval. This 30 day period would also apply to final agreements on the design of the culvert. Planning and Zoning Boar linutes April 28, 1986 Page 6 Chairman Dow asked Mr. Bartran if these conditions were acceptable to him. Mr. Bartran responded that they are acceptable. Member Kern commented that he did his own traffic count and found that in a half hour period roughly 1/2 of the in going vehicles stopped at Quail Hollow or Preston Trail and out of 1/2 dozen outgoing vehicles only one started at Preston Trail. He stated that he believed the traffic volume is not that great. He stated he would like to see City-wide studies on these traffic issues. Member Crews stated he supports the motion and commented that the direction of vehicles is unpredictable as Mr. Martell had previously stated. Member Brown commented that the alignment is not the deciding factor for this project. She added that the land use is appropriate and that the hazardous materials is not a factor at this time but hopes future plans will be developed to address the issue. Member Strom commented that the improvement of Horsetooth Road would be helpful to Preston Trail traffic. Member Edwards commented that land use is appropriate for this area. Chairman Dow concurred with the Board members on their comments. He stated that moving the access point will not solve any problems. He stated that the difference of street alignment of access points between this project and Fort Collins Retirement Residence/Nazarene Church is that the LDGS states the Board is to review each proposal by specific factors of that site and arrive at the best solution. He added that there should be a con- sistent policy regarding signatures on development documents. Motion to approve Collindale '85 PUD Final passed 7-0. /89-85 WEST GLEN PUD - Preliminary Steve Ryder gave a description of the property. Jim Martell, representative of the applicant, stated the applicant has addressed the concerns of the Board at the previous meeting. He stated one of the concerns raised was to increase the variety of design. These are manufactured housing units and will be built somewhere other than at the site. There is a great deal of variety of design on these units. The sec- ond issue raised was the variety of the plan itself and has been addressed as has the setbacks issue. The third issue dealt with parking adequacy which has been increased from 2.5 spaces/home to 3 spaces/home in addition to an area used for storing of recreational vehicles. The fourth issue was to integrate the open space which has been addressed by use of a trail system. The fifth issue was to increase the active open areas which has been done by including 3 playground areas. The sixth issue was to increase the landscaping but this will be done on the final plan. The seventh issue Planning and Zonin0ard Minutes • April 28, 1986 Page 7 concerned the points under the LOGS. This is not a high density unit devel- opment. According to the LOGS, the project only requires 45 points. This project received 50points which should satisfy the LOGS point system crite- ria. The eighth issue was with the home owners association and how to handle and control the covenants. The covenants have not been prepared. However, the developer would allow City staff to review and approve the covenants to insure that control and restrictions are included. A second issue regarding the covenants included concerns as to how the covenants will be enforced. Provisions could be included to allow the City to enforce the covenants if they feel the Home Owners Association is not doing an adequate job. A third issue of the covenants is the cost of the mainte- nance. There will be no pool on tennis courts which are high cost mainte- nance items. There will be land maintenance and exterior building mainte- nance which are high cost items. There will be insurance which is unpre- dictable in cost. The ninth issue is of compatibility. The neighborhood has different characteristics such as industry, commercial and high density residential. The existing surrounding uses does make this project compa- tible. The overloading of the schools is a matter that only the school district can take care of. This proposal is appropriate for this property and the concerns of the Board have been addressed. James Brannan, Dengler and Associates, responded to traffic concerns. The reduction of the project density has reduced the traffic impact by 17%. The widening of Laporte Avenue will allow a left -turn ingress lane into the project. The alignment of Canfield Drive is 75 feet from the Foothills Westland Church. All bridges of the driveways will be designed to city standards. The private drive cul-de-sacs turning diameter have been increased to accommodate fire and emergency vehicle equipment. The on -site parking is currently 3 spaces/unit with some off-street parking along pri- vate drives. There is parking spaces within the circle drives. A permit has been submitted to the Western Area Power Authority for a recreational park- ing facility within their utility easement. This will be reviewed by them in Phase 2. On -street parking will be permitted along Canfield Drive which is a 36 foot wide street. No parking will be allowed on private drives. Each unit will have wood siding, sloped roofs with shingles, and will be placed on permanent foundations. Each unit will have an automatic fire sprinkler system. The landscaping was a concern of the neighborhood and the preliminary plan. The plan indicates berms and evergreens along and across from the New Mercer Canal. There will also be wood privacy fencing along the western boundary. Mr. Ryder gave a staff report recommending approval with the condition that at the time of final review the applicant shall provide a typical lot landscape plan which shall show additional screening along the parking area and the southwest boundary of the site. Rod Hansen, 1944 Laporte Avenue, submitted a petition of 300 signatures from surrounding property owners who oppose the proposed project. He stated the architectural plan is not acceptable and will not have any diversity. Planning and Zoning Boar, inutes i April 28, 1986 Page 8 Jack Forney, Forney Industries, stated that the traffic situation is cur- rently a problem and this project could contribute to this problem. He stated that this project would generate problems of safety for children walking to area schools and along the ditch. Paul Anney, Irish Elementary principal, stated that the impact of addi- tional students to the school will be great. Irish is already a large school and asked the Board to consider this issue. Leilani Klausen, 530 North Taft Hill, asked what happens if the covenants are not adhered to. Mr. Frank stated that the City does not get involved in the covenants enforcement. The Home Owners Association is responsible for enforcing the covenants. Mr. Roy stated that if the City does require a right of enforcement of the covenants, the City might be deemed to be obligated to enforcement should a violation be brought to our attention. This issue should be researched thoroughly. Ms. Klausen stated that the surrounding areas would have to "adapt" and she sees no advantage to their neighborhood at all. Nancy Gray, 110 Fishback, stated that the neighborhood has a variety of age and income and has grown fragile with age. She stated she is opposed to the development and feels it looks like manufactured housing. However, it does meet the point system requirements which circumvents the very thing the point system was meant to avoid. We listened to promises regarding traffic going to Taft Hill. Laporte Avenue cannot handle anymore traffic. Dawn Hamilton, 1944 Laporte Avenue, stated she was concerned about the single entrance and exit on Laporte Avenue. She was also concerned that this development was being done without a "wholistic" approach and impacts on jobs, buyers of homes and schools. Mel Slagel, 330 North Taft Hill, had concerns about the storm runoff loca- tion and the access to the schools for the children which is already an existing problem. Art Mitchell, 1609 Richards Place, asked for the dimensions of the housing units which Mr. Brannan replied 16' x 64', and if the frames are steel which Mr. Brannan replied are wooden frames. Mr. Mitchell stated that to him the development appears to be a mobile home park. He added that these are to be low cost housing which he felt are to be designed for low income families. He was concerned as to who is really responsible for Home Owners Association enforcement and maintenance - the developer or the next door neighbors? He stated that he is strongly opposed to this development. John Mull, 325 North Taft Hill, was concerned about the density of the project, the walkway to the schools and the existing heavy traffic. Planning and Zoning•ard Minutes • April 28, 1986 Page 9 David Kelly, 2828 Wakonda, stated the development is too high in density and does not have the facilities to handle it. He added this project is not compatible and is opposed to the proposed development. Freeman Smith, 1000 W. Prospect, stated that the neighborhood opposed to this development deserves a better design and more consideration for this land. He added he did not like the innuendos of turning over the enforce- ment of the covenants to the City. Member Edwards asked why the footprints for the housing are perpendicular to the street and asked Mr. Brannan to explain the economics of this devel- opment. Mr. Brannan stated the economics are affected by the features of the site. There are quite a few barriers around the development as you go from the front to the back which include New Mercer Canal and Larimer County S2, an existing water line, and the overhead power lines. This leaves a cluster of developable land and small strips of land between barriers. Member Brown stated that in the slide show on manufactured housing that was shown to the Board at the worksession, there were garages, units built into hillsides, dramatic changes in elevations and roof lines shown on the sample lots. She stated that she sees no way any of this can be accom- plished to add to the variety and mixture in the project to make it appear like a single family development. She stated it looks like a mobile home park. She asked if the lots will be sold and can the buyer brings in what- ever choose, and if so, how does the orientation and pad size stand up. Mr. Brannan replied that the lots and units will be sold by and through the developer. The pads are not predetermined and will be up to the purchaser. He added that any size unit can go on any size lot. Mr. Frank stated that certain requirements can be placed for certain mix- ture of sizes of units to insure a variety. Member Brown asked if there are alternatives to handling traffic at the intersection of Canfield and Laporte Avenue. Mr. Ensdorff replied that the traffic study indicated 850 trips per day at this intersection. This is an acceptable level of service if the developer made improvements on Laporte Avenue with a left turn bay. A traffic signal would not be justified at this intersection. Member Crews moved to deny West Glen PUD Preliminary based on incompatibil- ity and urged Mr. Roy to decline the offer of enforcing the covenants. Member Kern seconded. Member Strom stated that manufactured housing is a compatible use for this area but the design plan does not reflect manufactured housing. He stated it does look like a mobile home park and the access and circulation within the site is poor. He added he will support the motion not because of the use but because of the design on the site. Planning and Zoning Boar Minutes April 28, 1986 Page 10 Member Brown stated that the plan is an improvements over the previous plan but concurred with Member Strom that the design is poor and it looks like a mobile home park. Member Edwards stated that manufactured housing should not be given a bad name but could with a bad site design as this one has. The infrastructure around this site is insufficient and cannot handle the impact of this pro- ject. Member O'Dell commented that this is a much improved site design consider- ing the constraints of the ditch and power lines. She stated she would vote no on the motion and support the project. Member Kern commented that this plan is improved from the previous plan but there are cramped internal roadways, too many high density manufactured housing sites in close proximity to this project and that he feels uncom- fortable approving something with unknown density in the area. Chairman Dow commented he agreed with the Board members supporting the motion to deny. He has concerns with ingress/egress of the site and the compatibility issues. Motion to deny passed 6-1 with Member O'Dell voting no. #26-86 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL '87 Joe Frank gave a description of the property and issues of concern which include: location, site development plan, traffic circulation, landscaping, parking design and building design. The Board's option on this item is to give a recommendation to the School Board or call for a public hearing. Steve Roy stated that the statutory provision says that the Board of Educa- tion shall submit a site development plan for review and comment before the Planning and Zoning Board before construction. The Planning and Zoning Board may request a public hearing before the Board of Education relating to the proposed site location or site development plan. This is not manda- tory, just an option. If a hearing is requested, the Board of Education is to schedule a hearing, give public notice and hold the hearing. The bottom line of this statutory provision is that "nothing in the subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of a Board of Education to finally determine the location of public schools within the district and to erect necessary buildings and structures." The public would have the opportunity to comment at the public hearing. George Golida, Construction Manager for Poudre R-1 School District, dis- cussed the school site. He stated the school will be equipped to handle approximately 550 students, the structure will be a one level floor plan of 50,000 square feet situated on 9.9 acres, the storm water would runoff directly into Mail Creek, there will be 52 parking spaces on the site west of the building with berming between the parking lot and the street, the landscaping will be four times as what is usually put on the schools as far as cost goes, the play area will be sod next to the building, asphalt play Planning and Zoninard Minutes • April 28, 1986 Page 11 pads and sand play fields. The building will be masonry with a glass - covered entrance. The boundaries of the property extend to the railroad east and west, to the south to the end of the district and to Harmony to the north. Member Crews asked what kind of street is Mail Creek Lane and if the school will improve it. Mr. Golida replied that the street is in the County. The asphalt paving is 30 feet wide and no improvements exist, such as curb and gutter and side- walks. The school district will put in curb and gutter and sidewalks on the frontage of the school site. Mr. Frank stated the school will have, in the short run, sole access from Fossil Creek Parkway. In the long run, Fossil Creek Parkway will connect through to Lemay Avenue and provide a second access point. In the future there may be street connections to Mail Creek Lane. The landscaping concern of the staff has been met by the school district but staff requires lands- cape screening along the play area to the north. The parking issue has been sufficiently addressed by the district. Staff is recommending approval to the School Board with the conditions that they consider landscaping and off -site street improvements be done to offset immediate impact of the school, and more detailed analysis be done in terms of parking needs and supply. Ray Spencer, 4112 Clayton Court, stated he opposed the access to the site due to the sole access having a large daily trip level of service. The bus traffic will be increased and felt a public hearing should be scheduled. Manny Rubenstein, 5309 Mail Creek Lane, was concerned that the site loca- tion of this school is not appropriate due to lack of safety regarding the streets and being too close to Mail Creek and the distance from emergency services. Mike Clinger, Fossil Creek resident, spoke in favor of the school. He did have concerns regarding the safety of the streets and the ditch. Denny Painder, 1725 Hotchkiss, stated he felt a public hearing should be held. He had concerns regarding the safety of the street in this area. Debbie Silar, Fossil Creek resident, expressed her willingness and enthu- siasm about the school. She stated that there is currently 3 busses in their area and was told that it would increase to only 5 busses total. She was pleased with the communication they have had with the School Board. Member Brown asked how many of the 550 students will walk to school. Mr. Golida stated that Golden Meadows area children will be going to this school so the figure can be distorted. Fossil Creek children will walk and Fairway Estates children to the north will be bussed due to lack of pubic access at the present time. Planning and Zoning Boat Minutes April 28, 1986 Page 12 Member Brown asked if consideration was given to having an easement between two property owners in Fairway Estates to make a walkway. Mr. Golida stated the terrain is terribly rough along there. The only place feasible for a walkway is along the creek but that is a hazard.. Member Kern was concerned about the narrowness of Mail Creek Lane and Fos- sil Creek Parkway particularly if children will be walking and biking. He stated the width is not enough for 2 way traffic and bikes. He asked if this issue has been addressed. Mr. Golida replied that the subdivision is in place and there is no antici- pation of improvements in this subdivision at this time. He stated that the street is 33 feet at Mail Creek and each lane at Fossil Creek is about 20 feet. Member Brown asked what are the parking requirements of staff and antici- pated volunteers. Mr. Golida stated that Riffenburgh and Shepardson has 50 parking spaces and staff numbers about 55. These 2 schools are overcrowded at this time. There will be visitor spaces available in addition to the 52 spaces. He commented that the school district has been working on this project for quite some time. He gave an invitation to the public to attend School Board meetings at any time to comment on this matter or any other matters. Member Edwards moved to communicate to the School Board concerns 1, 2, and 3 as outlined by staff recommendations. Member Kern seconded and amended the motion by giving consideration to a walkway and bike path along Mail Creek Lane. Member Edwards accepted the amendment. Member Brown commented that she would like the school Board to explore bike/pedestrian accesses to the north. Chairman Dow commented that this project needs to be viewed only as a plan- ning perspective. He had concerns with the traffic aspects and the location although the site plan was acceptable. Motion to recommend approval to the School Board passed 7-0. Member Brown moved to continue the April 28, 1986 agenda to Monday, May 5, 1986, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Member Strom seconded. Before the motion was voted on, Mr. Frank stated Spring Creek Professional Park has a conflict with continuing the meeting on May 5th. Ken Wolfe, representing the applicant of Spring Creek Professional Park, stated that they would be beyond statutory redemption time if they had to wait until the evening of May 5th for their review. Chairman Dow suggested continuing the meeting to Wednesday, April 30th. Planning and Zoning`ard Minutes • April 28, 1986 Page 13 Member Brown asked Mr. Frank and Mr. Wolfe if they were aware of this before the meeting tonight. Mr. Frank replied he was not aware of it until about 10 minutes ago. Mr. Wolfe replied he was not present at this meeting until approximately 10:30 p.m. Staff indicated that Council Chambers is available for Wednesday, April 30, 1986. Member Brown amend the motion to continue the agenda to Wednesday, April 30, 1986 at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers. Member Strom amended his second. Member Crews stated he would not be able to attend this meeting due to a previous appointment out of town. Motion to continue the agenda passed 7-0. OTHER BUSINESS Mr. Frank reminded the Board of the Planning and Zoning Board Orientation June 4th at 6:30 p.m. in the Transportation Services offices at 700 Wood Street. Mr. Frank also informed the Board of the Colorado Chapter APA Northeast Area meeting to be held Friday, May 9, 1986, in Greeley. He stated that if any of the Hoard members wished to attend let the Planning office know. The meeting adjourned at 11:30 p.m. 500 "ail Creek Court Ft Collins, CO 80525 April 25, 1986 Mr. Joe Frank Planning and Zoning 300 LaPorte Ave Ft Collins, CO 80522 Dear Mr. Frank, Thank you for your notices of the meetings on the new school in the Fossil Creek area. I will be unable to attend the one next Monday, but attended last night. While it is a commendable idea to locate a school in an area of low traffic density, I think it is more important that emergency vehicles have assured access to the building. This school has only one access route. There could be a bottleneck at College and Fossil Creek Parkway, anywhere along the Parkway, at the Parkway and Mail Creek Lane intersection, or anywhere in front of the school. In the event of any sort of emergency at the school, the area would be flooded with ambulances, fire engines, police cars and school busses, not to mention private vehicles of one sort and another. I just don't feel that one two-lane street assures access to this dead-end location. While it is too late to change the basic plan, two things can be done now: 1) The school board can be told that they must vigorously pursue all possibilities for a second access route (and not just wait for it to happen); 2) The school board can be told that in tho future any school must have an alternate access route .for emergency vehicles. In addition, plans could be made now as to the best possibilities for an access route from the east, so that any developer could conform with what was in the best interest of those already involved in the area. Sincerely, APR 28 1986 John Graves, M.D. PLANNING OEl'a RMUEW 00 CAR#EIPTION 'TION