HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 12/05/1967i
MINUTES OF MEETING
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
Fort Collins, Colorado
Members Present: Chairman Don Stuart, Lynn Anduss, Ken Pastor, Charles
Rhoades, Planning Director, Gene Allen, Assistant
Planning Director, Bob Engelke, and City Manager, Tom
Coffey, and Mrs. Wood.
Item # 1 #68-65 Consider Thunderbird Estates Sixth Subdivision
with B-G, General Business Zoning - eight lots.
Gene Allen: gave presentation. Pointed out that the
consideration at this time was routine due to the plat
having been approved before. The only change was in
the lot descriptions. These descriptions were now
platted rather than by metes and bounds. Also, streets
and easements were now in order.
Charles Rhoades: Moved presentation be accepted.
Lynn Anduss: Seconded the motion.
All Ayes.
Item # 2 #37-66 Consider Unit Development Plan, Fahrenbruch, Leisure
Village, Third Filing with R-P, Planned Residential and
R-H, High Density Residential Zoning - 168 living units, 1
clubhouse and beauty salon, and 1 personal care nursing
• facility.
Gene Allen: gave presentation. Attempt to recapture
original concept.
Glen Speece: Described plan as a park like atmosphere.
Jack Fahrenbruch: Stated he was pleased with the plan
and appreciated the help from the City.
Don Stuart: Asked when do you plan to develop the care
facility?
Jack Fahrenbruch: As soon as possible.
Lynn Anduss: Asked Gene Allen about overlap of apartment
building into R-P Zone.
Gene Allen: Explained provision for 25 foot overlap of
zones.
Lynn Anduss: Asked about landscaping plans.
Gene Allen: Presented same. We will still need a
utility plan. Presented storm drainage problem and
proposal.
Art March, Jr.: Questioned use of Parkwood Lake.
Lynn Anduss: Moved approval subject to utility plan
and resolving question of Parkwood Lake.
Ken Pastor: Seconded motion.
All Ayes.
Item # 3 #29-67 Consider Parkwood Subdivision Fifth Filing involving
7.3 acres with R-P, Planned Residential Zoning, eight
lots and one church site.
This item was not ready for consideration.
• Planning and Zoning *tes Page 2 • pecember 5, 1967
Item # 4 #52-67 Consider West Elizabeth Foothills Unit Development
Plan with B-P, Planned Business Zoning on 2.955 acres.
Gene Allen: gave presentation, and history and stated
parking was upto standards.
Russell Moore: Presented plan.
Art March: Just plan under consideration - Answer Yes.
Gene Allen: We need to involve Alvin Miller in improve-
ment agreement.
Don Stuart: Would you object if we contact Mr. Miller to
set up agreement.
Russell Moore: No.
Don Stuart: Do we need plans for landscaping?
Gene Allen: Yes.
Tom Coffey: Move tentative approval subject to land-
scaping plans and to involving Alvin Miller and to
utility agreement.
Mrs. Wood: Seconded the motion.
All Ayes.
Item # 5 #56-67 Consider rezoning petition involving 14.2 acres
from R-P, Planned Residential ro R-M, Medium Density
Residential Zoning.
Gene Allen: Gave presentation. Explained role of
Spring Creek and described locations of related features.
Alden T. Hill: Attorney for South Eventide presented
case for rezoning and distributed photographs of area.
His points were:
• 1. No land sales since 1965 rezoning (He felt this
indicated stagnation.)
2. Area is not first class residential.
3. Former objections were to R-H, with its lower
restrictions.
4. Have reduced height to five stories with three
wings.
S. Units from 96 to 80.
6. Was zoned C, until 1965.
7. Would landscape.
8. Cost over one million dollars.
9. Indian Hills allows 35 feet, so this at 50+- would
not hurt Indian Hills.
10. Elevations from Jim Stuart, could not see building
from eight intersections (five stories).
11. Old people do not have a lot of cars, i.e. no
traffic problems.
12. View to west - not Northeast.
Don Stuart: Any questions?
Mrs. Wood: Change in building.
Alden T. Hill: Reduced to eighty units.
Dynn Anduss: Asked if material would be the same as
before.
Answer: Yes.
Bill Allen: Attorney for some of Indian Hills gave
IV following comments:
1. Presented petition.
2. Referred to Plan for Progress.
3. Pointed out lack of control in R-M asopposed to R-P.
4. Discussed density under R-M and R-P.
planning and Zoning *Jtes
Page 3 • December 5, 1967
El
OP
5
6
7
8
9
10
Question - Is area stagnant or stable?
R-H means potential jobs and R-M apartment house
means no jobs.
Traffic problem.
Two hundred eighty-four potential living units.
Would agree to R-H for Nursing Home.
Could build building in R-P.
Don Stuart: Asked difference in R-M and R-P.
Gene Allen: Explained R-P permits 12 units per acre and
R-M permits approximately 20 units per acre. More land
would be needed for R-P.
Ken Pastor: Do you intend to buy all of Hahn's land?
Answer: Just what we need to build.
Mrs. Wood: Question of need for R-P in area, when at
one time we felt this was good zoning.
Don Stuart: Any other comments?
Tom Coffey: Moved to recommend to council that a sufficient
amount of land be rezoned to permit the unit and that
the proponents provide council with a description.
Ken Pastor: Seconded the motion.
All Ayes.
Item # 6 #57-67 Consider Rezoning Petition involving 6.789 acres
of R-L, Low Density Residential to 1.457 acres of R-M,
Medium Density Residential and 5.332 acres of R-P, Planned
Residential Zoning.
Bob Engelke: Located and explained. Stated that sixth
Fairview is immediately to the south; gave sizes of two
tracts involved, Bartran wants to build duplexes on
east side of Constitution.
Mr. Mickelson: Feels a development on order of Matador
would lower property values; more traffic from the units,
view is to the northwest.
Mrs. Wood: The plans are subject to review by both City
and nearby residents. Discussion on densities R-P,
and R-M).
Mr. Mickelson: Usually when multiples go in,businessthen
follows to serve.
Mr. Coffey: Motion to grant.
Lynn Anduss: Seconded the motion.
All Ayes.
ROE/skd
Respectfully submitted,
Robert 0. Engelke
Assistant Planner