Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 03/24/19860 •_ PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MINUTES March 24, 1986 The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board was called to order at 6:32 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 300 Laporte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present were Dave Edwards, Sanford Kern, Laurie O'Dell, Tim Dow, Linda Lang, Don Crews, Sharon Brown and Alternate Bernie Strom. Staff members present were Joe Frank, Bonnie Tripoli, Elaine Kleckner, Ken Waido, Steve Ryder, Bob Wilkinson, Matt Baker, Jan Shepard, and Gail Ault. Legal staff was represented by Steve Roy. Chairman Dow welcomed the public to the meeting. Mr. Frank reviewed the consent agenda which consisted of: #67-768, Windmill Apartments Addition - Amended Preliminary and Final; #14-86,14-86A, Wickes Annexation and Zoning; #15-86. 15-86A, Concrete Products Company Annexation and Zoning; #16-86, 16-86A. Skyline Acres Annexation and Zoning; /18-86, 18-86A, Thomas Annexation and Zoning; #19-86, 19-86A, Webster Annexation and Zoning; #20-86, 20-86A, Western Area Power Administration Annexation and Zoning; and #21-86, 21-86A, Mountain View Animal Hospital Annextion and Zoning. Joe Frank stated staff had pulled #17-86, 17-86A, Chadwick Annexation and Zoning from the Consent Agenda and #11-85B, 11-85C. Stute #3 Annexation and Zoning on the Consent Agenda and 76-85, Dry Creek Storage PUD had been continued until next month. _In addition an additional item #50-85A, Fort Collins Retail Center - The Pavillion PUD, Filing Extension was added to the agenda. Ken Waido explained an enclave annexation is when an area is completely surrounded by an incorporated area for three or more years the City can involuntarily annex it. The annexations are in conformance with the Intergovernmental Agreement. He stated property owners were concerned about taxes, utilities, and zoning. Existing utilities will serve the sites except City power will be provided within one year of annexation. Letters were sent to property owners on January 29 and March 14, 1986. At this time members of the audience asked that items #20-86, 20-86A, Western Area Power Administration Annexation and Zoning and 16-86, 16-86A, Skyline Acres Annexation and Zoning be pulled from the Consent Agenda. Chairman Dow indicated he would not vote on the annexation and zoning items due to a potential conflict of interest. Member O'Dell moved to approve Consent Agenda items 1-6, 11-14, 17 and 18. Member Brown seconded and the motion carried 7-0. Planning and Zoning ird Minutes -- March 24, 1986 Page 2 #16-86, 16-86A - SKYLINE ACRES - Annexation and Zoning Ken Waido gave staff description of Skyline Acres which contains 19 single-family dwelling units. It has been eligible since 1980 for annexation. Staff is recommending the RE Zoning District which allows large lots Systems, hstandards, and utilities. There will farm animals. Area concerns l be nozrrequiseptic requirement ems street to convert septic systems if they are in good working order and no requirement to bring streets up to City standards if the residents are satisfied with current streets. Loveland/Fort Collins Water District will remain and City Light and Power will be provided within one year of annexation. William Marlatt, 3611 Richmond Drive, questioned the improvements currently planned on Horsetooth and Shields and what costs would be incurred by the property owners. He also wondered why not all property owners received notification. Mr. Waido responded only one letter had been returned and was successfully resent to the occupant at that address. The streets are both major arterials and will be four lane although the timeframe for improvements is unknown, his guess would be within five years. Mr. Marlatt asked when the remainder of Horsetooth would be paved as currently only half the street is paved. Mr. Waido indicated there were no plans to four -lane the area directly adjacent to the subdivision at this time. Howard Enos, 3704 Richmond Drive, asked the intent and desire of the City regarding the completion of Brook Drive which had not been developed during the statutory limit of time and the procedure property owners should use if they wished to subdivide. Mr. Waido indicated Brook Drive was an existing right-of-way but he didn't anticipate a need for the City to put it in. According to the procedure for subdivisiresidents owould ben in required to develop.Brook Drive ld be created; however, if they had frontage. Mr. Frank interjected further subdivision would require notification of area residents as well as providing citizens the opportunity to comment at a Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Mr. Marlatt wondered if the houses on well water could remain, what changes might occur, and why another Richmond Drive has been added north of Horsetoth and ot affecto othe houses s having t of hwellsields� for ewater d and eilrr gationied �.aRichmondtion lin is an approved street in Williamsburg PUD and will eventually connect with Skyline Acres Richmond Drive and Jane Street will be eliminated. Mr. Marlatt questioned if septic systems could be repaired if necessary, and who would pay for the cost of bring sewer to Skyline Acres. Mr. Waido responded Couty Health Department required tying into City sewer if a septic system fails. He explained the charge procedure as well as the payback processas other residents tied into the line. Planningg and Zag Board Minutes March 24, 1986 Page 3 Mae K. Lee, 3711 Richmond Drive, asked what's provided as far as street lighting and other protection, Mr. Waldo responded that, since Richmond is not currently up to City standards, it would remain as it is unless residents desired it be brought to City standards at which time theneighborhood would be assessed the cost perhaps through the formation of a Special Improvement District. City police will protect the subdivision. A net tax increase of 1.48 mills would result with the annexation. Howard Enos asked about snow removal and seal coat to hard surface areas. Mr. Waldo responded it was not City practice to remove snow on residential streets. He would have to check into seal coating; however, if the street was not currently City standard, the City would not maintain it. Member Strom asked if annexation made a difference regarding the improvements to Horsetooth and Shields. Mr. Waldo responded it did not. Member Edwards moved to approve the recommendation to City Council for annexation. Member O'Dell seconded and motion carried 7-0. #17-86, 17-86A CHADWICK ANNEXATION AND ZONING Ken Waldo gave a brief description indicating Mr. Chadwick opposed the annexation. He requested if it be annexed to receive an R-E zoning rather than the I-P initially proposed by staff. He would like the annexation delayed until the property to the south is annexed which Ken indicated could be as early as 1989. Member O'Dell asked the advantages of annexation and what would constitute a reason for the exception. Mr. Waldo indicated staff was following the direction of council in these forced annexations which are technically in the City but legally out. Member Edwards voiced a concern the Mr. Chadwick was not at the meeting and Mr. Waldo stated he had received a letter stating the date of meeting and indicating he could send a letter in opposition, which he did. Member Kern moved to recommend to City Council approval of this annexation and RE zoning, Member Lang seconded. Motion passed 7-0. Mr. Waldo indicated staff would respond to Mr. Chadwick's concerns by letter. Council does not send out notifications other than the newspaper notice but our earlier letter stated it would be heard at the April 15 Council meeting. 2046, 20-86A WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION ANNEXATION AND ZONING Ken Waldo gave a description indicating the property had been an enclave since 1973. He had discussed annexation with Ron Carey of Poudre Valley Rural Electric Association and Dave Griffith of WAPA. Their concerns were with the zoning and if a power station was a use by right. Planning and Zoning and Minutes J March 24, 1986 Page 4 Ron Carey, General Manager of Poudre Valley REA, requested the property not be force annexed. He indicated it was not a statutory requirement since the property in question was neither a subdivision or development. They supply their own electricity and have no need for water or sewer. Member O'Dell asked for a legal opinion. Mr. Roy took the position the parcel was within the intent of the Intergovernmental Agreement. Member Kern asked what negative impact there might be with the annexation . Mr. Carey responded the City would duplicate a service they were providing themselves as well as increase their taxes, though insignificantly. The utility felt they should be exempt from the Intergovernmental Agreement. Member Kern questioned the necessity of City providing electricity and what would happen in the instance of a fire on the property now and after annexation. Mr. Waido responded we would have to research the necessity of City providing power. The property is now serviced by Poudre Fire Authority and that would not change. Upon annexation City police protection would be provided. Member Brown moved to recommend approval to City Council of the item as the Intent was clear. Member Edwards seconded and motion carried 7-0. #13-869 13-86A SPRINGFIELD i2 ANNEXATION AND ZONING Ken Waido gave a description of the property currently used as church and surrounded by RL or RLP properties. The existing use would become a conforming use. Mr. Marc Middel, property owner, had several discussion with staff regarding this item. Marc Middel, 1407 S. College, owner of record, felt the annexation would be unfair. He gave a detailed account of what costs would be incurred to him totalling $1282.52 annually if he did nothing to the property to a high of $40,234 if he improved the property with an addition. He felt the only benefit he would be receiving was police protection. He provided the Board with a map of the property as well as a letter indicating why he was currently being taxed at a commercial rate even though the property was being used as a church. It does not have the tax exempt status since it is not owned by the church. He stated he desired the B-L zone since it would not limit the uses as greatly as the staff requested R-L zone and he considers the property as commercial because of its tax status. Ken Waido noted Mr. Middel's fees research was accurate; however, his property warrants some payment toward street improvement and storm drainage. The R-L zone allows a number of uses including church and school. Staff did look at the Limited Business zone but because of land use policies discouraging strip commercial development they felt it inappropriate. The only access to the property would be from Shields. He reminded the Board they are looking at this from a land use standpoint, not a property value or assessment aspect. Planning and Ang Board Minutes •- March 24, 1986 Page 5 Mr. Middel stated common sense indicates the property is not of the single-family genre. Member Kern noted the surround zoning was R-L to south and east and -Ken added it was R-L-P to north and west. Member O'Dell indicated she was sympathetic to Mr. M1ddel should he choose to redevelop but since the Board 1s dealing with this as a land use issue she moved to recommend approval to City Council. Member Kern seconded. Motion carried 7-0. 11-86 COLLINDALE 185 PUD - Preliminary Elaine Kleckner gave a description of the proposed project. Bill Brenner, Robb & Brenner Inc., Architects, stated several key people were available to answer any questions. He went on to emphasize some of the project's strong points: lower density on north with highest density on interior of site. Density is 8 du/acre. Developer has worked hard on landscaping and changed some parking along Horsetooth to meet staff's concerns. Ms. Kleckner gave the staff summary indicating it was an appropriate land use and positive (compatible) site design. The staggered layout of the parking garagesis good but we need to insure fire access concerns are addressed. Staff recommends some landscaping improvements; ie., more evergreen plantings. Two neighborhood meetings show the residents' concerns are traffic impact: access off Carlton and traffic filtering to the north to Horsetooth. The traffic engineer doesn't feel the project will increase the traffic flow significantly and staff is recommending approval with conditions that the parking spaces near horsetooth road be deleted and landscaping added, and planting materials overall be increased. Chairman Dow asked if the elimination of the parking wording could be softened to allow other design solutions and Elaine Kleckner responded it could be worded "explore options along Horsetooth." Member Brown noted she felt transportation and storage of hazardous materials (specifically from NCR) was a problem that needed to be addressed. Ms. Kleckner stated she knew two trains per day traveled the tracks but had no knowledge on hazardous materials. Staff could review that prior to final. Janet Thompkins, 1531 Preston Trail, indicated the neighbors were not excited about additional condos in the area. Their biggest concern, however, was the increased traffic. She felt the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, Filings were well planned diverting traffic to major arterials; however, this project encourages traffic on the residential side streets. Platte Valley Power Authority has two accesses on Horsetooth, approximately 102 cars daily and has no problem with entry or exit from Horsetooth. Also, near J.F.K. Parkway several accesses onto Horsetooth are provided. Certainly those areas are more congested indicating additional accesses for this project could be provided on Horsetooth. Planning and Zoning vaard Minutes March 24, 1986 Page 6 Ron Karavensh, 1601 Preston Trail, asked what access the future development to the west of this project would have. Elaine Kleckner indicated the traffic engineer felt the western property would have access to Lochwood with the possibility of an access onto Carlton but access onto Horsetooth was unlikely. Without knowing exactly what was going to occur on that property it would be difficult to try and line up a street from the proposed project with what might happen to the west. Mr. Karavensh indicated he strongly disagreed with the trip counts having watched the traffic in the neighborhood. Bill Hutton, 1725 Collindale Drive, voiced his concerns. He is new to the area but has developed his driving patterns because of the condition of Horsetooth Road. The narrower streets are safer and Horsetooth needs to be made easier to use. Chairman Dow asked what plans had been submitted for the property on the west. Mr. Brenner stated there was no specific plan. The original Master Plan shows planned residential with different densities. Ms. Kleckner noted several access unto Lochwood were shown with one access on Horsetooth and one to Carlton. Chairman Dow questioned whether staff had discussed with applicant the possibility of lining up the access on the proposed property with that of the property to the west. Ms. Kleckner indicated they had. The offset was not preferred. Those that were directly lined up were the safest and easiest. Access points close to Horsetooth might interfer with traffic turning onto Horsetooth. Member Kern asked what recourse there would be if traffic became a problem. Ms. Kleckner indiated various steps could be taken. Speed bumps and neck downs were discouraged in new subdivisions. Stop signs might work. A negative response was heard from the audience in response to Member Kern's questions on how residents felt about stop signs. Member Kern asked about the low area on the southeast portion of the site. Mr. Brenner indicated they were working with the Corps of Engineers in trying to keep the area natural. Member Kern asked about noise abatement methods. Mr. Brenner preferred a berm to a fence. More importantly because the number of trains was minimal they hoped building construction could address the noise abatement problem. Member Brown felt preserving the detention area as a natural habitat was preferable. She asked about building setbacks, and indicated her concern over the hazardous materials. Mr. Brenner responded noting hazardous oferials industry, G reside tia7, not entereictommercial nand office nuses g. hand D allowsGS the plan mixes well. W Planning and Zong Board Minutes •_ March 24, 1986 Page 7 Member Strom asked about moving the access to match with the property to the west. Mr. Brenner indicated, because the property to west doesn't have a plan, it's difficult to do. They feel the access is at the right spot, providing a larger green area at the Horsetooth entrance which is aeshtetically better. Member Edwards asked whether now was the logical time to predetermine where the access would be to the undeveloped phase. Mr. Brenner stated an access onto Carleton probably was in order but to locate it now would be a guess. He feels future residents of the project will use Horsetooth when the properties are fully developed rather than filter through the neighborhood. Member Brown agreed that access from Centennial to Lemay was awkward. Chairman Dow felt Carlton was a concern and the western area should be preplanned to some extent. Member Lang moved to approve Co111ndale '85 PUD with the conditions that: 1) applicant and staff re-evaluate the plan in terms of increasing the landscaped area between the parking area and Horsetooth Road; 2) planting materials be increased; and, 3) the applicant and staff look at the possibility of realigning the project entrance at Preston Trail to match the curbcuts to the undeveloped parcel to the west as shown on the Master Plan. Member Kern seconded. Member Brown asked that hazardous materials be addressed at final. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Brenner indicated they would relook at entrance location, however many items were involved including drainage . Member Lang asked for some thoughts regarding the area to the west and Mr. Kern noted he shared the neighbors concerns; however, passing through an area exists all over the City and did not see a major problem. 12-86 PARKWOOD EAST PATIO HOMES PUD - Prelimi-nary A Final Steve Ryder gave the description of the project. Eldon Ward, Cityscape Urban Design Inc., described the surrounding area. A neighborhood meetings was held and the treatment of property backing Creekwood and Kirkwood was the major issue. Steve Ryder gave staff summary noting project was architecturally compatible with the neighborhood, distribution and orientation of the duplexes acceptable, and concerns were with the noise from the pipe factory and potential traffic from the ice arena. The conceptual plan was improved and staff and neighborhood concerns had been addressed. Staff was recommending approval. Member O'Dell wondered about the Master Plan of the area. Mr. Frank stated no master plan had been submitted to his knowledge. Member Brown asked about emergency turns on Creekwood and Mr. Ryder noted the plan met City standards. Planning and Zoning and Minutes March 24, 1986 Page 8 Paul Thompson, President Fort Collins Pipe Company, asked if anything had been done to address the noise between the Pipe Company and residences. Mr. Ward indicated the property does not abut the Pipe Company. Mr. Ryder noted there was a distance of over 300 feet and the noise is a concern from existing residences but no solution has been arrived at. Chairman Dow noted the pipe company was there first. Member Brown questioned setbacks and building materials. Mr. Ward described the duplex lots and materials would be lap siding and brick with asphalt shingles. Member O'Dell asked the status of homeowners associations. Mr. Ward noted the duplexes would have an independent association and there would be none for the single-family units. Member O'Dell moved to approve the project, Member Brown seconded, motion carried 7-0. 186-85A CARL'S JR. RESTAURANT AND CAR WASH PUB - Final Ms. Kleckner gave a description of the project located at 1515 W. Elizabeth. Alan Houser, Architecture One, reviewed the site plan showing the modifications: moving the car wash to the east and allowing additional parking and intensified landscaping. He introduced Ed and Bob Giamarrino from California who are planning to set up an office in Fort Collins and build several Carl's Jrs in Colorado. Art March, attorney, was available to answer questions. He stated Carl's Jr. has sufficient parking on site. No formal agreement regarding shared parking had been signed with Chesterfield, Bottonsly and Potts as CBP was not willing to do so. Chairman Dow questioned dedication of mutual access and joint parking when CBP lease expires. Legal Representative Roy noted the additional access would be accomplished by formal dedication or private agreement. Ms. Kleckner gave the report noting two of the three staff concerns had been satisfied. Fifty-two parking spaces was adequate and landscaping had been revised to staffs' satisfaction. An agreement for shared parking or redesign of a curbcut cannot be obtained at this time so staff is recommending approval with condition this be obtained in the future. Chairman Dow questioned enforcement of this condition. Ms. Kleckner indicated the development agreement has language in it for a redesigned curbcut; however, the item is important enough to warrant a condition on the approval. Mr. Roy noted the Board can decide if they want a conditional final. Planningg and # ng Board Minutes March 24, 1986 Page 9 Scott Hudson, General Manager, Chesterfield, Bottomsly, Potts, noted they are in favor of the project except for the shared parking and granting shared access. They feel a need to protect their parking lot. Member O'Dell asked where the cars parking on the project would park when the project was built. Mr. Hudson responded they normally have excess parking, except on Friday evenings. CBP doesn't feel the shared parking would be of advantage to them. Member Kern moved to approve the project with the condition to reconstruct the Pott's parking lot entrance and dedication of an access easement when legally possible. Member Edwards seconded. Motion carried 7-0. Member Brown noted she was not happy with the parking in general but this project was not responsible for the problems of the area. Member Crews asked about access of site from CBP into Carl's Jr lot and if lease permits that. Mr. Houser didn't anticipate parking in the planned access area. Mr. March noted there would be no legal problem with having the access area open on the Carl s Jr. property. #22-86 DAYIES EXEMPTION - County Referral Bob Wilkinson gave the description for a 32 acre and 10 acre exemption request. William L. Davies, property owner, Mapleton Utah, stated he had been asked to give 20 additional feet of right-of-way for Douglas Road. He has already been set up to give 30 feet and feels this additional easement unfair, especially considering the small amount of traffic on Douglas Road. He noted several years ago a neighboring property had not been required to give the additional 20 feet. Chairman Dow noted while he may be the first asked to give up this additional 20 feet there would be others asked in the future. Bob Wilkinson gave staff summary noting the property meets the requirements for an exemption except for the dedication of 50 feet of right-of-way, rather than the 30 feet Mr. Davies is proposing.. Member Brain moved to recommend approval to the County with the condition the 50 feet of right-of-way be dedicated. Member Kerns seconded. The motion carried 7-0. Member Edwards appreciated Mr. Davies concern but noted ultimately the amount of right-of-way dedicated would be appropriate. Member Crews agreed. /23484A CHERRY HEIGHTS PRELIMINARY PUD - County Referral Bob Wilkinson gave the description of this 113 single-family proposal. Planning and Zoning .-ard Minutes March 24, 1986 Page 10 Lucia Liley, attorney representing the applicant, summarized the project by noting the staff may perceive incompatibility but County staff had been swayed by the legal arguments that zoning controls the property therefore the County is recommending approval. Chai intonthe UrbaneGrowthven the Area. Ms.'cLileytnotedsthehproerty applicant should was not eligible for annexation into the City and this was not the time for pursuing an amendment to the UGA. Mr. Wilkinson gave the summary noting County is recommending approval but City Staff recommends denial based on the land use issue. Other design concerns include: 1) sidewalk needed on at at least one side; 2) car pool parking not segregated well from residences; 3) additional landscaping is needed; 4) fencing design guidelines should be provided; and, 5) open space should be planned for. Chairman Dow asked if City could enforce these five conditions and Mr. Wilkinson stated they would be recommendations. Member Kern moved to recommend denial based on staff's five concerns. Member Brown felt in order to remain true to planning policies we must recommend denial and seconded the motion. Motion to recommend denial carried 7-0. Mr. Roy noted while we don't want to encourage anyone in an illegal act the Board needs to know the County may not be in a position to follow our recommendation. /50-85A FORT COLLINS RETAIL CENTER - The Pavillion - Filing Extension Mr. Frank indicated final approval for The Pavillion given at the January meeting was subject to the agreements being signed and delivered within 45 days. The applicant was seeking extension of that deadline. Chairman Dow questioned the procedure that was followed for this request. The applicant, Jim Johnson, Sullivan & Hayes, requested an extension of staff before the 45 day period has ended. There was some question whether 45 days meant "working days" or not. 45 working days. Mr. Roy noted the request had been received prior to March 20; therefore, whichever date was used the request was still valid. Chairman Dow asked if public notice should be involved and Mr. Frank indicated staff has the discretion to bring the item to the Board as an administrative item. Mr. Roy concurred. Chairman Dow noted there was no substanial change in the PUD and Mr. Frank indicated staff felt comfortable with the proposal. Planning and Z0ng Board Minutes March 24, 1986 Page 11 Mr. Johnson stated the off -site anticipated to secure and requested no benefit to the City to turn down date would be approximately May 12 notified prior to the May 19 meeting. !_ easements were taking longer than in additional 45 days. Mr. Frank saw the request. Member Kern noted the which allowed the Board time to be Member Kern moved to grant the extension to May 12. Member Crews seconded.Member Brown questioned how the Board originally arrived at the 45 days. Chairman Dow noted it was considered a reasonable amount of time. Member Kern expressed concern that this might set a precedent. Chairman Dow felt exceptions must be looked at carefully. Motion to grant the extension carried 7-0. Chairman Dow asked staff about the appeal of the 817 Sycamore proposal. Mr. Frank noted Boards approval was reversed by City Council with the findings of non compatibility, land use too intensive, scale of the buildings inappropriate and project didn't adequately address the concerns with improvement of the alley. Mr. Frank noted there would be an orientation session for the Board, Thursday, April 17, 6:30 pm in the CIC roam on the City's major development regulations. A tentative orientation was set for May 14 with Rick Ensdorff, Traffic Engineer addressing transportation planning. Board suggested covering future plans, Master Street Plan, and front range study as well as public transportation. Mr. Frank will notify Board if the date changes. Meeting was adjourned at 11:15 pm. M THE LARIMER COUNTY TREASURER P.O. BOX 1250 FORT COLLINe. COLORADO W= (303) 221.7020 CHARLES L WOODWARD Treasurer M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mr. Marc Middel Middel Realty FROM: Mr. Charles L. Woodward Larimer County Treasurer DATE: March 20. 1986 SUBJECT: Parcel Number.97350 00 020 In accordance with Colorado Statues, it is the Treasurer's duty to collect taxes based on the assessment certified by the County Assessor. a as Mi subs ,row t1C. ct'e i1be.dAs as if certe CLW: it low KEN P P.O. BOX 1190 Fr. COLLINS,uiNsco e0522 (303) 221-7050 MEMORANDUM To whom it may concern: This memorandum is in reference to property owned by the Stonybrook North, Inc., John H. and Marc Middel, owners. This property is located at 4036 So. Shields, Ft. Collins, Co. and is identified on the Assessor's roll as parcel number 97350 00 020, This property is carried on the Assessor's roll as+.t[ gmBnt and 900fthe laaW'ami 1upV&v*x"W ari:valaag accord—/ Any further questions can be directed to the County Assessor, phone 221 7054. ZCeWin o Larimer County Assessor - I- '. FC'JR SEASOI 13,00c0 cars s 1984 PLANNED UNIT DEVELO 20,000 cars 2000 • � RIY LAND USE DESIGNATIONI NI Commercial withandscaped Open SpacAPPROX. GROSS ACRES APPROX. NET ACRES 3 HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES 1 Story REMARKS i 36.000 S.F. Floor Area (fAl) •a . aeae arm a.uam rtmr jiy"lere arW saV♦1Ye H-1 Clustered/Multiple Family Apartment -Condo APPROX. GROSS ACRES 31.5 APPROX. NET ACRES 29.5 TOTAL NUMBER OF i DWELLING UNITS 409 HIEGHT OF STRUCTURES 1 8 2 Story DWELLIpr WITS PEP r,CPE 10 to 20 ' Ioraina9e Easement' �.-' SCALE: I" • 200' •, , VFW. a'. . 8,000 cars 1984 ..-. 16,000 cars 2000 'I n EIGHBORNOOD SERVICE CENTER E 16.5 ACRES 140000 - 150000 S.F N SCALE: 1" 600' LI BOUND/ DRAINA MAJOR DRAINA IOO YR QZ HI SHADE.E VICINITY MAP �TM�aoa^ M-