Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 08/22/1983MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FOR THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS The regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board for the City of Fort Collins was called to order by Chairman David Gilfillan at 6:33 p.m. on August 22,. 1983, in the Council Chambers of the New Municipal Building, 300 West LaPorte Avenue, Fort Collins, Colorado. Board members present included: David Gilfillan, Tim Dow, Randy Larsen, Dennis Georg, Sharon Brown, Don Crews, and Ingrid Simpson. Board member absent was Gary Ross. Staff present included: Curt Smith, Linda Hopkins, Bonnie Tripoli, Hauri Rupel, Cathy Chianese, Ken Waido, Joe Frank, Sherry Albertson -Clark, and Renee Oldham. Legal representative present: Ken Frazier. Chairman Gilfillan introduced the new board member, Sharon Brown, to the audience. Mauri Rupel reviewed the items on the Consent Agenda. Chairman Gilfillan noted the approval of the minutes was omitted from the agenda and requested it be included with the Consent Agenda. The following items were pulled from the Consent Agenda to be discussed individually: Baystone Village (#53-83); Kirkwood Condominiums (#52-83); Overlook PUD (#50-83); and Village at Harmony West 1st Filing - Final (#25-81C). Steve Olt requested the Landings Park Subdivision (#51-83) be placed on the Consent Agenda; however, this was denied. Dennis Georg made the motion to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of the above noted items. Don Crews seconded. The motion carried 7-0. BAYSTONE VILLAGE (#53-83) Cathy Chianese gave the summary of the Baystone Village - R-H Site Plan Review. Neighborhood comments regarding the parking problems were the impetus to pull this item from the Consent Agenda. Robert Sullivan spoke in opposition to the development stating that he had concerns about the traffic and the drainage problem. Perhaps a way to reduce some of this problem is to reduce the numberjof units. Mauri Rupel stated the traffic engineer had studied this situation ''and found no problem. The developer would be required to make additions to the storm drainage system. Harry Kingman spoke regarding the parking problems. Cathy Chianese stated the applicant was providing more parking than required for this development. Bill Brenner, architect, addressed concerns in project. Privacy is important to applicant. In this zone the density could be increased and still meet P & Z MINUTES August 22,'1983 Page 2 zoning. The applicant started with 90 units and reduced it to 78 units. Member Georg asked if there was additional information on the traffic problem. Bill Brenner stated no. Member Larsen asked for the lot size of Baystone Village. Brenner responded, 2.53 acres. Cathy Chianese stated it was 30 feet from the houses between Columbine and Daisy Streets to the proposed fence in Baystone Village Condos in response to a questions from Member Georg. Bill Brenner stated there will be predominantly students and the close proximity to C.S.U. will enable them to use bicycles or walk rather than using cars. Member Dow asked how this R-H site plan would fare using the point system. Cathy Chianese stated it would achieve 100%. JoEllen Brown stated the parking has been a problem. There are approximately 2 cars per condo and the area is very congested. Her father bought the condo because it was a smaller development. Chairman Gilfillan stated the board could not evaluate on the previous statements made by developers. Applicant Barbara Bejmuk stated amenities were discussed with the fraternities and sororities, specifically a tennis court, but they were not able to achieve that. She also stated there were many parking spaces that have never been used. Member Georg stated 150 bedrooms will add to congestion with parking. There are nice homes in the area and the project needs more landscaping; also the height is incompatible with the single family homes. Member Dow stated they cannot place all the parking problems on the applicant. Member Crews stated the history of the area was written and this is a good infill project. Member Simpson stated it is a well needed use and that transition is hard with single family homes. Member Georg stated the project supports its own needs but cannot solve the problem. Member Crews made a motion to approve the project; seconded by Member Dow. The motion carried 4-3 with Members Larsen, Georg and Simpson voting no. OVERLOOK PUD (#50-83) Cathy Chianese gave the summary for the Overlook project stating that 5 build- ings are proposed consisting of 72 1-2 bedroom units including handicapped and low housing units. Chairman Gilfillan asked about the closeness of the buildings on the south side and surrounding uses. Cathy Chianese stated to the east was zoned R-H; north was I-G (Water Pik); west was R-L-M; and south was R-M with 2-212 story apartment buildings. The grading is important as the units will not be as high as anticipated for a 21 story building. Jim Gefroh, architect, stated these will be 2z story buildings and the grade on the property drops considerably sloping to the southeast. Member Larsen P & Z MINUTES • • August 22, 1983 Page 3 asked where the handicapped units would be. Gefroh stated they would be placed close to the handicapped parking. Chairman Gilfillan asked about drainage. Gefroh stated detention in the upper part would drain to the detention on the lower part and then to Riverside and into Spring Creek. Member Dow asked about the setbacks on the south. Gefroh stated they were 15 feet south to the property line. Member Dow asked about landscaping. Gefroh stated there was a 6 foot fence with trees and shrubs. Member Dow made a motion to approve the Overlook PUD - Preliminary and Final; seconded by Member Larsen. The motion carried 7-0. VILLAGE AT HARMONY WEST PUD - 1st Filing - Final (#25-81C) Joe Frank gave a summary of the project. Mike Myshatyn from The Ridge Homeowners Association spoke stating that homes had sold in The Ridge for $160,000 to $225,000. Concern about rental units across the street from "exclusive" homes. Jim Gefroh stated these were not rental units they are single family attached townhomes. There will be setbacks from the center of Harmony Road of 120 feet. Parking areas will be inside the development; pool and clubhouse at the entrance, they will respect the area across Harmony. Two major types of units: A 6 unit cluster around a courtyard and a lineal approach in a 2 story and 1 story in a cluster. Member Dow asked the price range. Gefroh stated they would be $80,000 to $90,000. Member Dow asked about the extent of improvements to Harmony. Joe Frank stated the applicant will have to develop Harmony to a full arterial half width along the frontage of the property and, if this property develops prior to Pineview PUD, this developer will provide a 36 foot pavement from his property to College Avenue. Member Georg stated it was a good project and made a motion to approve; se- conded by Member Crews. The motion carried 7-0. KIRKWOOD CONDOMINIUMS PUD - PRELIMINARY (#52-83) Cathy Chianese gave a summary of the project and stated it was pulled from Consent Agenda because of neighborhood comments. Member Simpson asked if there are any 4-plexes in the neighborhood. Cathy Chianese stated there are. Member Brown asked about the height of the build- ing. Cathy Chianese stated it would be a 2 story building. Jay Stoner, appli- cant, stated it would be 28 feet high with square footage of 908 square feet in 2 units and 750 square feet in 2 units. Stoner stated the surrounding buildings range from ranch to 2 story. Member Brown asked about the exterior P & Z MINUTES August 22, 1983 Page 4 material. Stoner stated it would be stirbridge, painted taupe. Member Brown asked if there would be stone, brick or rock. Stoner stated lots of glass but had not determined about brick, rock, etc. There would be lots of landscaping. Marion Summerhays stated there are some not very attractive duplexes on Kirk- wood and felt this would be a positive addition to Kirkwood Drive. Joe Carter objected to the plan because it is a duplex lot, not a 4-plex lot, and is unfair to previous homeowners. Member Dow asked if he would feel the same if it were 2 3-bedroom units. Carter stated he felt the exterior stairs and the detached garages were not compatible with the area. Stoner stated he had spoken with Gary Haxton on the architectural control committee and would work with him for compromises. There is one other duplex with detached garage. Chairman Gilfillan asked why not a duplex. Stoner stated economics. ,The design was in existence and he looked for a lot for the project. Chairman Gilfillan asked the estimated market. Stoner stated $55,000 to $60,000. Member Crews asked what the board's relationship to the architectural control committee is. Attorney Ken Frazier stated there was none. Member Brown asked if applicant should have the approval from the architectural control committee before coming to the board. Cathy Chianese stated the Board is interested in land use only. Margaret Montgomery stated this was a duplex lot; would not like to look at stairway everyday and that the premises would probably not be owner occupied. Chairman Gilfillan stated he was concerned with the 4-plex and could not support the project. Member Simpson asked if it would be applicable to restrict use to owner occupied. Chairman Gilfillan stated the Board could not put restrictions on development like that. Member Dow stated the Board cannot get into existing covenants, etc. Approving this project would not set a precedent for other projects on Kirkwood since this is the'last vacant lot on the street. Member Dow ',stated he felt this is consistent with the other homes on Kirkwood and moved to approve the project. Member Brown seconded the motion. Member Simpson asked about parking on the project. Cathy Chianese stated she felt this project has too much parking. Member Georg stated this is a large lot and there are a variety of duplexes and 4-plexes on Kirkwood. The motion carried 5-1-1 with Chairman Gilfillan voting no and Member Larsen abstaining due to a perceived conflict of interest. P & Z MINUTES • August 22,'1983 Page 5 HELMSHIRE HOUSE PUD - PRELIMINARY - REVISED (#30-83A) • Sherry Albertson -Clark gave a summary of the project. Applicant Harry McCabe had letters in support of the project from the adjoining property owners. Member Simpson asked about handicapped parking. McCabe stated they will be located close to the entrance of the building. Carr Bieker, architect, stated they added architectural character to the project to give it a country inn atmosphere in a contemporary building with historic flavor. The scale is in line with others in the neighborhood. Although the building is a 3 story, the third story is in the roof making it appear lower. There will be extensive landscaping and a fence with brick and wrought iron. Member Dow asked how far the applicant will have to improve the alley. Bieker stated it would be from Edwards to Pitkin. Member Larsen stated it was a big improvement and moved to approve the pro- ject; seconded by Member Simpson who commended the applicant's persistence. The motion carried 7-0. COLUMBIA ESTATES PUD - PRELIMINARY (454-83) Joe Frank gave a summary of the project. Carr Bieker, architect, stated they had addressed the concerns of staff and the neighborhood and cut the project to 75 units. This project would be a higher price, better quality than the usual Fort Collins development. The church would be converted to a professional office building; increase the open space and no building would be closer than 30 feet to the property line. Matt Delich, traffic engineer, stated he did a traffic impact study. The project is, feasible and the additional traffic is minimal for the project. Chairman Gilfillan asked about interior lighting. Bieker stated it would be residential lighting with some tall street lights. Member Georg asked why the elevation difference for 2 footprints next to the single family lots. Bieker stated next to the existing homes would be 1 story units. Chairman Gilfillan asked about the ditch. Bieker stated it would be dealt with like Chippewa Court, lots of landscaping and layering of bushes for kids' safety. Art March, attorney representing owners, said the changes were beneficial but will still' have an adverse effect on the single family neighbors. There would be lots of asphalt compared to open space and the green area is minimal. There will be extreme runoff and the road will have an effect on the homes. The density is still objectionable. P & Z MINUTES August 22,1983 Page 6 Carl Bachus is in opposition particularly to the parking lot at the north of the project. The greenbelt area is more for the aesthetic quality of his home. Bieker stated it is not critical as to where the parking lot is placed. Dave Brown', stated he would back up on the "grass street" and felt there would be trafficproblems on Columbia. Joe Frank stated there were studies with the traffic engineer and a light would be needed at the corner of Columbia-Lemay- Parkwood in 1987. If a signal is needed, it will be installed and will solve many problems. Butch Demrow has concerns about privacy. People will be making turnaround in his backyard. He feels 150 automobiles will have a high impact on the traffic congestion. Linda Chapman supports the project. She is impressed with the project integra- ting into the neighborhood and the townhomes are of the quality needed. Rosalie Everson feels the open space is affected and more west greenbelt area is needed. John Atkinson felt the proposal would lessen traffic problems compared to the complex the church was contemplating adding. Bud Bacheller, Parkwood Homeowners, felt the density was too high; too much traffic would be added; and there would be problems with drainage into Parkwood Lake. Karl Carson from Parkwood Meadows asked about the right in and out. Joe Frank stated that off Lemay it would be a right in only with no exit. Carson also asked about the 30 second delay study. Arnold Hein felt the traffic would be greatly impacted. Jan Guswell asked for an indication of the people in support of the project, about 15 raised hands. Chairman Gilfillan then asked about those in opposition to the project, about 35 raised their hands. Lynn Grove, commented that fireplaces in every unit meant more chimneys and pollution, traffic would be impacted, there was not enough landscaping, and would add to the concentration of the whole area. Chairman Glfillan asked about the traffic onto Columbia. Joe Frank stated the street out of the project lines up with the end of the median on Columbia. Member Georg asked about the average interarrival rate; the maximum length of cars on Columbia at 4:15-5:30 p.m. Matt Delich stated there were 3 cars and 30 seconds between 80 second signals at Stuart and Drake. Member Georg asked about the traffic projections. Delich stated he met with Rick Ensdorff of traffic for projections. Delich stated the 30 seconds were observed on a Friday in late July. Bieker said the pre-existing peak hours of traffic would P & Z MINUTES • • August 22, 1983 Page 7 not be substantially added to by this project. A signal would improve traffic on Lemay. Fireplaces will be standard until someone or something says no. Chairman Gilfillan asked about the fireplace study. Ken Waido stated that City Council has taken steps to increase monitoring stations for good monitoring of pollution, but nothing definite has been established. Member Georg moved to approve the project subject to the following conditions: Full review at final of the grading, runoff, perimeter road, parking lot on the north, and traffic. Member Brown seconded the motion. Chairman Gilfillan stated that if he sees a dramatically improved plan he will support the motion. Member Dow stated he would not support the motion because it is a difficult property; the impact on Lemay and Columbia would not be as great as the impact on the neighbors. Member Larsen agreed with Member Dow. Member Simpson asked what would go on the site that would not be incompatible with single !family. She felt the units were good, but the site needs light. Member Crews will not support the project as there is too little green area and too much concrete. The motion was defeated 3-4 with Members Dow, Larsen, Crews and Simpson voting no. Member Dow moved to deny the project; seconded by Member Simpson. The motion carried 5-2 with Members Georg and Gilfillan voting no. Bieker asked if the applicants could come back. Chairman Gilfillan said they were welcome to come back with more detailed information. ASAMERA PUD (#33-82) Joe Frank gave a summary of why Asamera was requested to attend the meeting and about the temporary occupancy. Wayne Bishop from Asamera asked that the letter to Mr. ,omen and a letter from Mr. Amen be made a part of the record. Chairman Gilfillan stated he felt there was more glass and the border signage was out of 'character with the building approval. Bishop stated the smaller framed windows originally planned were changed to the larger window to enable the clerk to see out; the signage meets with City Code and because they conformed with code did not feel they were not in compliance. Chairman Gilfillan asked about the change in the shrubs. Joe Frank stated that tree roots could cause problems in the future. Member Georg asked that the variances and administrative changes be summarized. Joe Frank stated the changes were (1) change the orientation of the pump islands; (2) relocate water service lines; (3) conversion of building envelope; and (4) functional changes to the envelope. Everything except the colors and signage on the facia were approved. P & Z MINUTES August 22, 1983 Page 8 Member Georg asked if the number of pumps was approved. Joe Frank stated they were. Member Simpson asked if there was a desiduous bush that would be more attractive. Joe Frank stated the potentilla is a hearty plant that does not lose its leaves in the winter. Chairman Gilfillan stated the applicant was welcome to Fort Collins and hopes they improve various gas stations around town and commended their time and effort. He still has problems with the glass. Bishop stated the clerk could still see out and police could see in in case of robbery. Member Simpson stated the advertising covering the windows appears to lose some of the security. Member Brown asked about the color for the facia and signage. Bishop stated that the firm of Shank and Associates did a study and came up with the blue and yellow., Member Georg stated he was disappointed with the board. The building looks significantly different than what was approved. Many variances for this project were made. Bishop stated the building is open for business and everything has been approved. Chairman Gilfillan said that under the PUD the Planning and Zoning Board makes a decision and needs to watch what and how changes are made. He suggested issuing the certificate of occupancy but waive the red flag of caution to the staff and board. Bishop said he felt the board thought they had done something contrary to the board, but they had taken all the proper channels. Member Dow stated the recommendation of City staff was to change the colors and the signage and asked the applicant if he was in a position to agree to the changes,. Bishop stated he would have to wait for Amen. Chairman Gilfillan asked if all the changes had come before the board. Frank continued, they had. Member Dow 'asked for clarification on what the board was trying to do. Member Georg moved for recommendation for certificate of occupancy and future administrative changes to cone to the board. The motion was seconded by Member Larsen. Member Dow, stated he was voting no because the board was overstepping its bounds. The motion was defeated 3-4 with Members Dow, Larsen, Brown and Simpson voting no. Curt Smith stated the project was acceptable and asked what direction the board wanted to go. P & Z MINUTES • • August 22, 1983 Page 9 Member Larsen stated the project with the administrative changes changed the look of the approved project. The board cannot dictate colors and made a motion to approve the administrative changes to the island landscaping. Member Georg seconded the motion. The motion carried 7-0. SPRING COURT PUD - PRELIMINARY (#124-80A) Sherry Albertson -Clark gave a summary of the project. Leonard Szopinski intro- duced himself as the architect for any questions. No questions. Member Georg moved to approve the project; seconded by Member Larsen. The motion carried 7-0. SOUTHRIDGE GREENS FAIRWAY V, PHASE III PUD - FINAL (#9-82G) Cathy Chianese gave a summary of the project. Chairman Gilfillan asked about tandem parking and if the turnarounds would be maintained by the homeowners association. Cathy Chianese stated that tandem parking was parking available outside the garage area. Member Dow moved to approve the project; seconded by Member Crews. The motion carried 7-0. RCD PUD - 2nd FILING (PHASE II) - Preliminary/Final (#226-79A) Cathy Chianese gave a summary of the project. Member Dow asked how it blends with the other projects in the area. Cathy Chianese stated the surrounding areas were approved for commercial use and the proposed project blends well with the other approved projects in the area. Member Dow asked what the surrounding uses are. Cathy Chianese answered north is Creger Plaza; south is Winstons and no other buildings have been built in the area. Chairman Gilfillan asked about improving the perimeter streets. Cathy Chianese stated the applicant will have to improve Mason and Colboard Streets. Member Crews moved to approve the project; seconded by Member Simpson. The motion carried 7-0. VILLAGE AT HARMONY WEST PUD - 2nd FILING - PRELIMINARY (#25-81D) Joe Frank gave a summary of the proposed project. Mike Myshatyn from The Ridge had two concerns: (1) the street is directly across from Regency Drive the main street into The Ridge and Harmony has a speed limit of 45 mph. Concerned about thei people flow out into The Ridge; and (2) the placement of the shopping center. Tony Hughes, architect, stated the traffic will be con- trolled. The location of the professional offices will be an office park with landscaping and will be a select operation. Mike Myshatyn asked if the offices would be single story. Hughes stated that it would be a domestic nature. Myshatyn asked when the traffic signal would be put in. Mauri Rupel replied it would be put in when the need was there. Member Crews asked what would be done with Pleasant Valley Canal. Mauri Rupel replied it was to be taken care of a part of the Pineview PUD. P & Z MINUTES August 22, 1983 Page 10 Member Dow moved for approval of the project; seconded by Member Larsen. The motion carried 7-0. REMINGTON PLACE R-M SITE PLAN REVIEW (#49-83) Sherry Albertson -Clark gave a summary of the project and pointed out the concerns expressed by the neighborhood which were: (1) utility capacity; water pressure; (2) neighborhood character - reduced number of units; (3) lack of privacy - a 6 foot privacy fence will not help that much; and (4) traffic and parking would not impact much or put street beyond capacity. Staff shares the concerns of the neighborhood specifically the introduction of a 2 story structure into a 1 story neighborhood and the orientation of the residence would affect the privacy of the neighbors. The use is not compatible with the neighborhood. Staff recommends denial. Rick Hattman, architect, differs with staff in that he feels compatibility is good. They have met the criteria of zoning. Russ Smith, adjacent property owner, stated that the project will increase the population; create traffic problems, add to the noise pollution and parking problem, intrude on the privacy, will create a utility overload, will change the character of the neighborhood, and will affect the property values. Chairman Glfillan wondered about changing the atmosphere or keeping it a single family residence neighborhood. Smith stated he liked the atmosphere of the neighborhood. Raymond Langstaff, south side adjacent property owner, stated he had three kids and would not like to have the added traffic and people next to him. He was also concerned about the drainage problem. Mauri Rupel stated it would increase the runoff and would be retained and released at the two year historic rate. Don Svitak, applicant, stated he has owned the property since 1975 and felt that with both lots to build the apartment house on he had taken the surrounding owners into consideration. Whitcomb and Myrtle had set a precedent for infilliprojects. Hattman stated the parking split into the rear and the living areas would be east and west. The increased size of the trees would help scale the building. Del Garity stated the two trees were Chinese elms should have been taken out long ago. The street is a traffic freeway for the fire department and many people use Remington as an alternate route from College. Member Larsen stated he voted against Whitcomb and Myrtle and made a motion to deny the project; seconded by Member Brown. Member Simpson stated each item had to be evaluated individually. The motion carried 7-0. P & Z MINUTES August 22, 1983 Page 11 r, I L LANDINGS PARK SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY/FINAL (#51-83) Sherry Albertson -Clark gave a summary of the project. Member Dow asked about potential questions as to why it was not on Consent Agenda. Sherry Albertson - Clark stated this item should have been on the Consent Agenda and staff did not have any problems with it. Member Georg made a motion to approve the project; seconded by Member Brown. The motion carried 5-0 with Member Larsen excusing himself from the discussion due to a perceived conflict of interest. OTHER BUSINESS Under Other Business Mauri Rupel asked the board to consider changing the time of the worksession to 2-5:00 rather than the lunch worksession. He also reminded the board that elections were coming up. The last item was the Lands of Agricultural Importance Work Shop scheduled for August 24 and 25, 1983. Member Simpson moved to adjourn; seconded by Member Brown. The meeting was adjourned at 12:38 a.m.