HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 04/19/2007Chairperson Lingle called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.
Roll Call: Campana, Lingle, Rollins, Schmidt, Smith, Stockover and Wetzler
Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Waido, Shepard, and Sanchez -Sprague
Director of Current Planning, Cameron G
Campana's conflict with Consent Agenda
School 4`h Filing Major Amendment & 6 h
motion/vote on the consent agenda.
Citizen participation: None.
loss, reviewed the agenda noting Member
Items 2-7 and Discussion Agenda Item 13, Harmony
Filing Replat. Campana left the chambers for the
Consent Agenda:
1. Minutes for November 16, 2006 and March 15, 2007 Planning & Zoning Hearings.
2. Resolution PZ07-01 Right of Way Dedication Front Range Village project
3. Resolution PZ07-02 Right of Way Dedication Front Range Village project
4. Resolution PZ07-03 Easement Dedication Front Range Village project
5. Resolution PZ07-04
Easement Dedication Front Range Village project
6. Resolution PZ07-05
Right of Way Dedication Pads at Harmony development
7. Resolution PZ07-06
Easement Dedication Pads at Harmony development
B. Resolution PZ07-07
Easement Dedication at Capitol Hill Addition Subdivision
9. Resolution PZ07-08
Easement Dedication at Morans Subdivision
10. Resolution PZ07-09
Easement Dedication at Morans Subdivision
11. Resolution PZ07-10
Easement Dedication at Morans Subdivision
Discussion Items:
12. Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan
13. #42-89L Harmony School Shops 4'h Filing Major Amendment and 61h filing Replat
Member Schmidt moved for the approval of the consent agenda which includes minutes for
November 16, 2006 and March 15, 2007 and Resolutions PZ07-01 through PZ07-10.
Member Rollins seconded the motion. Motion was approved 6-0.
Member Campana returned to the Chambers.
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 2
Project: Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan
Project Description: Colorado Revised Statutes 31-25-107 (2), requires the City Council to
formally submit the Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan to the Planning
and Zoning Board for its review and recommendation as to the Urban
Renewal Plan's conformity with City Plan, the City's Comprehensive
Plan. The Planning and Zoning Board needs to submit a written
recommendation to the City Council.
Staff Recommendation: Approval.
City Council by resolution (Resolution 07-2040) at their April 17, 2007 meeting referred the Foothills
Mall Urban Renewal Plan to the Planning and Zoning Board for its review and recommendation as to
the Urban Renewal Plan's conformity with City Plan as required by Colorado Revised Statutes 31-25-
107 (2) which states:
"Prior to its approval of an urban renewal plan, the governing body shall submit such plan to
the planning commission of the municipality... for review and recommendations as to its
conformity with the general plan for development of the municipality as a whole. The planning
commission shall submit its written recommendations with respect to the proposed urban
renewal plan to the governing body within thirty days after receipt of the plan for review."
The Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan will derive its policy guidance from City Plan. The regulations
of the City's Land Use Code will be applied to development and redevelopment projects within the
Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan's boundaries.
In 1982, the Fort Collins City Council created an Urban Renewal Authority (URA) and designated itself
as the governing board (known as the "Authority"). The boundaries of the URA are the municipal
limits. The Fort Collins URA was created to prevent and eliminate conditions related to certain "blight
factors" in the community. State Statutes give the URA broad powers to carry out its statutory
mandate. Included are the powers to enter into contracts, borrow funds and acquire property
voluntarily or by eminent domain, among others. Urban renewal projects may be financed in a variety
of ways. URAs are authorized to borrow money, issue bonds, and accept grants from public or
private sources. The principal method of financing urban renewal projects is through obligations
secured by property tax or sales tax increments from the project area ("tax increment financing"). An
URA exercises its powers by planning and carrying out urban renewal plans in urban renewal areas.
In 2004, the City Council adopted an update to City Plan, the City's Comprehensive Plan. Principle
GM-8 of City Plan states the following:
The City will promote compatible infill and redevelopment in areas within the Growth
Management Area boundary.
And, Policy GM-8.1 of City Plan states the following:
Targeted Redevelopment/infill. Redevelopment and infill development will be encouraged in
targeted areas. The purpose of these areas is to channel growth where it will be beneficial
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 3
and can best improve access to jobs, housing and services with fewer and shorter auto trips.
The targeted areas are parts of the city where general agreement exists that development or
redevelopment is beneficial. A major goal is to increase economic activity in the area to
benefit existing residents and businesses and, where necessary, provide the stimulus to
redevelop.
These areas should be defined from City Plan, Subarea Plans, Zoning and locational criteria ,
including areas where public investment is warranted from a policy perspective. The Foothills
Mall (Area #6) is one of the Targeted Redevelopment Areas.
Other selected policies of City Plan include the following:
Policy GM-8.5 Public Investment. The City will consider opportunities, and the costs and benefits for
targeted public investment in order to encourage redevelopment and infill development in appropriate
locations.
Policy ECON-1.5 Maintain and Expand City Revenue Base. The City will ensure that commercial uses
that generate the sales and use tax revenues which support the City's financial base are maintained
and expanded. The City will also explore other options to expand and diversify its revenue base,
including targeted annexations of existing commercial corridors, such as the Mulberry Corridor, as
well as revenue sharing agreements with other communities. The City will seek to strengthen existing
commercial districts, such as the Downtown, North College, Campus West, and the Foothills Mall.
The City will seek to maintain and enhance its attractiveness as a place to do business in order to
maintain its share of the region's sales and use tax base.
In addition to the policies of City Plan, the Foothills Mall redevelopment is identified in the City's
Economic Action Plan as the "single most important retail redevelopment initiative in the City." This
plan also identified establishment of an urban renewal plan as the "most effective manner for the City
to assist in the redevelopment" of the mall.
The area in question is 72 acres and includes the commercial properties in an area bordered by
Swallow on the north, Stanford on the east, Monroe on the South and College on the west. The City
has been approached by General Growth Partners (GGP,) the owners of Foothills Mall, to recognize
the mall as an urban renewal project area and to create an urban renewal plan for it. Foothills Mall
Redevelopment objectives include:
• Replace Mervyns with future anchor tenant
• Replace JC Penney's with future mini -anchor tenant
• Update interior common area
• Addition of exterior facing streetscape along Foothills Parkway
• Redevelopment of Shops at Foothills
• Redevelopment of Perkins site
• Redevelopment of the Plaza at Foothills Mall
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Board forward a recommendation to the City Council that
the Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan is in conformance with City Plan. Terry Ware, of Terrance
Ware & Associates prepared the Foothills Mall Existing Conditions Survey.
Mr. Ware as well as representatives of GGP were available for questions.
Member Schmidt asked if funds generated from tax increment funding (TIF) could be used for items
such as the Youth Activity Center. Waido responded that there is a broad range of possible items
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 4
including utilities, public common areas, and facades. TIF expenditures are reviewed and approved by
the Urban Renewal Authority, which is this case will be City Council. GGP will submit a proposal that
will be reviewed and components approved by the Authority.
Member Stockover asked if there were any other property owners within the defined area. Waido
responded that the only other property owners are Macy's and Sears. All other land is owned by
GGP.
Chair Lingle asked with regard to the Foothills Urban Renewal Plan's conformance to City Plan, some
of the blight conditions noted in the survey report include loading dock and vehicular and pedestrian
circulation problems. How would those conditions be mitigated in a redevelopment proposal? Waido
remarked that staff has not seen any proposal that speaks to mitigation of those problems.
Member Schmidt, in the same vein, asked how the faulty lot line problems could be mitigated. Ware
noted the problems are a result of the building configurations and site expansion constraints. The
answers will be found in a redevelopment proposal and how it deals with 'necessity and possibility' for
improving building configuration and circulation patterns.
Chair Lingle asked if the definition of "blight" found on page two of the survey, which states "...at least
four of the following factors, substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of the municipality"
relates to the determination of blight as found on page 10 of that same report. Ware responded there
is a difference. He noted on page 2, item I "if there is no objection by the property owner or owners"
only one factor need apply in this instance (rather than the items listed from a to k on that page.)
Waido reported that notification had been given to owners and tenants in the affected area and no
concerns have been forthcoming. In fact, the tenants are resoundingly in support of the renewal
efforts.
Chair Lingle ask about maintenance related issues. Is State statute language silent on the issue of
whether self imposed delayed maintenance and rental vacancies create blight. Deputy City Attorney
Eckman said yes —the state statute is silent. It makes no mention of external or self- imposition and
there is no requirement to dig deeper for the reasons.
Member Schmidt asked why it was beneficial to list the seven factors in the summary of findings —it
results in the expectation that all might be addressed. Ware responded that it presents a thorough list
and there are no reasons not to mention them. Member Schmidt asked if this was a common
practice. Ware said yes —it has been his experience in other blight survey work he'd done in
Colorado, including mountain resort areas, Colorado Springs and Denver.
Member Smith asked what is the role of the other two property owners to comment or object? If the
URP is approved, what is their role in approving any future plans? Waido responded that if an urban
renewal authority is established, they could make their own application for redevelopment and be
eligible for tax increment funding.
Member Rollins asked when redevelopment plans are presented would they be reviewed by the
Board and would they be able to check whether factors related to blight had been addressed?
Deputy City Attorney Eckman referred the Board to Section 5 of City Plan. All developments would be
reviewed in accordance with the Land Use Code and other applicable standards in the development
review procedures. Chair Lingle asked if staff would be reviewing the redevelopment proposal
addressing the items that would mitigate blight. Director Gloss responded that staff would conduct a
review as a matter of course using the breadth of Land Use Code standards including architectural
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 5
and site design. There is nothing specific in the Land Use Code or in the actions being taken tonight
that have reference to the site's blight conditions.
Member Schmidt said if was her impression the Urban Renewal Authority would review any
redevelopment proposal and make any determination of how TIF funds would be appropriated.
Campana asked for clarification --had the area already received a blighted area designation? Waido
responded no. The first step of the process took place on April 17, 2007 when by resolution City
Council referred the Foothills Mall Urban Renewal Plan to the Planning and Zoning Board for its
review and recommendation as to its conformity with City Plan. On May 15, the issue will come back
before City Council. If they determine the area is blighted, they will set the boundary and establish the
urban renewal authority.
Public input
None.
Member Smith asked for clarification of number 9 of the Foothills Urban Renewal Plan —Reasonable
Variations. Can the URA veto development standards or design guidelines? Waido said no. The
section refers to modification of the Urban Renewal Plan and not City Plan policies or regulations.
Member Schmidt said since this is a recommendation, would the Board be allowed to make additional
comments in that recommendation. Eckman suggested that he takes the motion and create a
resolution. Anything the Board would like to say over and above their determination of conformance
with City Plan could be included in that resolution.
Smith made a motion to notify City Council the Foothills Urban Renewal Plan is in
conformance with City Plan for the following reasons: City Plan's GM 8.5 Public Investment
Policy and ECON 1.5 Maintain and Expand City Revenue Base with the Foothills Mall
specifically noted in that policy. Schmidt seconded the motion.
Member Rollins wondered how beyond the motion/resolution, the Board would have the opportunity to
present additional comments to the URA related to items in the existing conditions survey at the time
a redevelopment proposal is referred to the Board. Eckman asked if the Board wanted to
communicate anything additional to Council and it would take an amendment to the motion.
Member Campana, who sat on the City Plan Update Committee for 18 months, thinks this project is
right on target with City Plan. Where he thinks there are reservations is the language seems too
open -ended —how will the funds be spent.
Member Schmidt asked if any of the tenants had been surveyed. Waido reported he sent a letter
notifying affected parties of their opportunities to provide feedback. The letter spoke of the open
house, the P&Z meeting, and the May 15t' City Council meeting. If they could not attend any of the
events, they had the option of sending feedback or posing questions. He had not received any
communication.
Member Schmidt's intent in putting forward a second motion is to indicate to City Council that the
Board may not be in total support of the blight study as presented. She'd like to suggest that Council
modify the report to more truly represent the conditions that exists —specifically items b and I on page
2 of the report.
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 6
Member Stockover suggested the Board was over analyzing. The recommendation to City Council is
the Foothills Urban Renewal Plan is in conformance with City Plan. He believes City Plan will handle
all the issues at the time the redevelopment proposal is reviewed.
Member Campana said that while the Board may agree the plan conforms to City Plan, are they
implicitly agreeing with the appendix (the Existing Conditions Survey.) He'd also like to let Council
know the Board is not affirming the blight study as presented.
Chair Lingle said that while he agrees that redevelopment is desirable, the URA is only one tool in the
toolbox and not the right tool in this case. He believes the whole plan is under -girded with the existing
conditions survey. Fort Collins would be no different from other communities where issues were
taken on how urban renewal plans were used --the ends justifying the means. In good conscience, he
cannot support that.
Member Wetzler stated he does support the motion. He's seen some deterioration at the Mall and
along Monroe Street in which major redevelopment and renovation are in order. At the very minimum
the architecture is dated and unattractive. He thinks for the reason that it would spur economic vitality
in that area, the URA should move forward.
Member Schmidt remarked that her worst fear is that anything 20 years or older in need of renovation
would be considered blighted and we'd be setting precedence. North College is a different problem —
it had no infrastructure to begin with.
The motion passed with a vote of 6:1.
Member Schmidt made a motion to ask City Council to review the Foothills Mall Existing
Conditions Survey in detail and to reassess which elements (which constitute blight) are truly
present at the mail. Wetzler seconded the motion.
Member Stockover believes the motion/action would be overdoing it. The Board's role is making the
recommendation relative to conformance with City Plan. It would then be City Council hands. Is the
Board throwing up road blocks resulting in the loss of time, effort and money? There are poor
conditions --there is no need to restudy it. When Council adopts the URA, they can decide what to do
relative to which definitions of blight apply to the Foothills Mall.
Member Campana does not want to create road blocks. He appreciates all that General Growth
Properties has invested in the community and will continue to do. He does, however, think TIF funds
should be used for redevelopment of the exterior and not on items such as HVAC and interior design.
Member Smith read through the summary of existing condition survey findings and agrees with them.
He believes the community should take the expert at their word —looking at specific examples such as
the loading docks and vehicular and pedestrian circulation for improvement. He finds no fault with
report and will not support the motion.
Chair Lingle believes it's kind of the reverse. The more specific the items you include, the more you
set the bar on what should be mitigated in a redevelopment. Due to the site's constraints --
configuration of the site and the buildings, lowering the bar (being more focused on specific
improvements) you'd be more likely to meet your objectives.
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 7
Wetzler noted there are a lot of things at the mall that do not work. Until presented with new ideas,
he's confident in City Council's ability to evaluate and to determine which action to take. He's more
inclined to err on the side of accepting, approving and moving it forward.
The motion passed 4:3.
Project: Harmony School Shops 4`h Filing Major Amendment and 6`h Filing
Replat, #42-89L
Project Description: This is a request to amend a final plan, formerly known as Timberline
Village Shopping Center, located within a portion of the Harmony School
Shops 4h Filing. The purpose of the amendment is to accommodate an
entirely new group of tenants which would be anchored by a 24-hour
fitness club. In addition, there would be a mix of retail, restaurants, and
a beauty school. Total leasable square footage is 85,524 square feet
divided among three buildings one of which is a multi -tenant, large retail
establishment. The site is bounded by Harmony Road, Timberline Road
and Milestone Drive. It consists of 11 acres and is zoned H-C, Harmony
Corridor.
The Major Amendment includes a Request for Modification of Section
3.5.4(C)(3)(c) which pertains to the backside of the large retail
establishment.
Recommendation: Approval of the Modification and Major Amendment
Hearina Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Chair Lingle reported that Member Campana has declared a conflict of interest and has left the
chamber.
Chief Planner Ted Shepard reported Harmony School Shops 4`h Filing Major Amendment and 6th
Filing Replat, #42-89L is a request to amend a final plan, formerly known as Timberline Village
Shopping Center, located within a portion of the Harmony School Shops 41h Filing.
The purpose of the amendment is to accommodate an entirely new group of tenants which would be
anchored by a 24-hour fitness club. In addition, there would be a mix of retail, restaurants, and a
beauty school. Total leasable square footage is 85,524 square feet divided among three buildings
one of which is a multi -tenant, large retail establishment. The site is bounded by Harmony Road,
Timberline Road and Milestone Drive. It consists of 11 acres and is zoned H-C, Harmony Corridor.
The Major Amendment includes a Request for Modification of Section 3.5.4(C)(3)(c) which pertains to
the backside of the large retail establishment. This has to do with the fact that the applicant contends
that due to the existence of the regional stormwater detention pond, it is practically infeasible to
construct a berm, with landscaping, as required by the standard. Staff has evaluated the request and
agree the granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and is equal to or
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 8
better than the standard because the setback from the rear lot lines of Sunstone 7`h Filing by a
distance ranging from 95 feet to 120 feet significantly exceeds the 35 foot requirement.
Michael Chalona, Land Images Planning Consultant, representing the owner thanked staff for their
help in moving the project forward to this stage of review by the Board. He would like to outline why
this plan is better and why it should be approved.
Better design solutions for the surrounding neighborhood including improved residential sound
buffering from the traffic noises generated by Harmony. The site is bordered by residential
neighborhoods to the north and east. The buffering to the north consists of a combination of
an existing stormwater detention pond, landscaping and architectural features on the north
elevation of the large retail establishment (health club, retail and private vocational school).
The separation between the commercial buildings and the rear property lines of the homes in
Sunstone Village 7�' Filing ranges from a low of 95 feet and a high of 120 feet from the large
retail establishment.
The buffering to the east is provided by a 45-foot building setback and landscaping. Overall,
buffering is accomplished by a combination of distance and landscaping that mitigates the
impacts potential conflicts reasonably anticipated to exist between residential and commercial
land uses.
• Less intense service use with the removal of a grocery store from plan
• Fewer buildings/more landscape
• Better distribution of parking
• More public space and pedestrian access. The sidewalk circulation system provides for a
walkway connection from Milestone Drive to the large retail establishment.
Similarly, a walkway will be constructed to the east property line and tie into the Pads at
Harmony, located east of the site and in front of the Harmony Mobile Home Park. This walk
will continue east to Snow Mesa Drive and Front Range Village. Interior sidewalks,
crosswalks and plazas are provided throughout the project to facilitate movement among
buildings and the three plazas.
• Lighting. Parking lot lighting will feature down -directional and full cut-off fixtures. There are no
foot-candles that exceed the maximum allowable. Decorative pedestrian -scale light fixtures
will be provided at the plazas and along walks at the building entrances. Wall -mounted
fixtures will also be down -directional.
• 360 degree architecture for the large retail establishment, there is an allowable exception to
the build -to line since there is an internal connecting walkway system and outlying pad
buildings that are closer to the public streets. For the two smaller detached buildings, these
buildings are required to be set back from Harmony Road at least 80 feet.
All three buildings exhibit sufficient architectural variety by the use of wall articulation,
consistent use of quality materials, clearly defined building entrances, and generous use of
windows, arcades and awnings. These three buildings feature a recognizable base and top by
use of different concrete block as a wainscot and a variety of roof lines. These buildings are
slightly differentiated yet provide a sense of cohesiveness that helps unify the center.
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 9
All four facades are articulated. All but the north elevation feature store -front details with
entrances, windows, arcades and pedestrian amenities.
Traffic Management.
Milestone Drive is a collector street between Timberline Road the private access drive into the
center. East of this access drive, Milestone transitions down to a local street. The only reason
to use Milestone Drive would be to gain access to the immediate neighborhood. All of the
neighborhood streets curve and have posted for 25 miles per hour and do not outlet onto a
collector or arterial street that would be an attractive cut -through destination.
Timberline — Milestone Intersection. There will not be a traffic signal at the tee intersection of
Timberline and Milestone as it is located too close to the Timberline/Harmony intersection.
Instead, the intersection will be designed with a "channelized tee" to allow Milestone
westbound left turns onto southbound Timberline. The turn movements will be controlled by a
re -designed median in Timberline Road.
Harmony — Snow Mesa Intersection. The Harmony/Snow Mesa intersection is now signalized
allowing full turn movements. Snow Mesa is a north -south collector street that serves the
present and future phases of the Poudre Valley Hospital Harmony Campus. The north leg
aligns with the present access to Harmony Mobile Home Park and will be further improved
with construction of The Pads at Harmony commercial center. With cross access, this
intersection will complete the circulation system for the general area, including Harmony
School Shops and Sunstone Village 7" Filing
Chalona believes it's a great project for the neighborhood and the city. It'll contribute to the economic
health of the city as a number of national tenants have already committed to the project (contributing
to its stability.) There is also room for local business to work within the project. For all the reasons
listed above, he requested the Board approve the major amendment and modification requests.
Member Schmidt asked about pedestrian access from the mobile home park to the east. Chalona
noted it was not possible to make connection due to the mobile home park fence and the individual
lots beyond it.
Member Wetzler expressed concern about the use of landscaping materials that might hinder visual
corridors at the end of the parking lanes, as you go into main traffic patterns. He wanted to know how
tall the landscaping material would be and if sap from trees would be an issue in the parking lots.
Chalona responded that that shrubs would grow up to 24-30" and trees at the installation time would
be visually clear below five to six feet. There is a mix of trees as required by Code. He's been in
conversation with the City Forester and believes the mix, the size and the placement are all
acceptable as to Code. With regard to the sap, it's his impression that sap comes from trees that are
unhealthy.
Member Schmidt asked if this development was considered a "Big Box'. Shepard responded yes and
that was why there was a modification request —it's required for Big Box only.
Member Smith asked what the neighborhood concerns had been and where their collaborative efforts
had take place. Chalona responded that concerns raised at the neighborhood meeting had been the
buffer between the residences and the development and pedestrian access.
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 10
Member Smith asked in the context of hours of operation for clarification on the classification of this
Big Box project --previously it had been designated a neighborhood center. He noted there are also
community and regional classifications in the Code, would staff please explain the difference from the
original to the current proposal. Shepard explained given the mix of tenants, this project is a
community scale project drawing customers outside the neighborhood whereas with a grocery store it
had a neighborhood classification.
Chair Lingle asked for a visual of what the previous proposal had been. Shepard reviewed the
differences from a slide provided by Land Images.
Public input
Joe Heiney, 1912 Timberline Lane, lives to the west of the proposed development. Traffic and how it
flows was a concern. He lives on a cul-de-sac west of the Diamond Shamrock and his only access
out is a right on Timberline (heading south.) With the proposed expanded median he will no longer to
turn left when he's driving north on Timberline into the development. He noted it's a nightmare now
and will only become more so with the changes. If you look at the Safeway Center or Old Chicago, it
allows entrances but coming out it makes it difficult to get from point a to point b.
Suzanne Tyler, 4436 Stoney Creek Drive is very thrilled about the development. Her only concern is
the detention pond. With a hard rain the other day, it was a big mess. She's concerned with all the
hard surfaces in the parking lot and whether it will be a flooding problem in the long term.
Public Input Closed
Matt Delich, the development's traffic engineer consultant, addressed the issues raised by Heiney.
The proposal calls for a channelized tee —full movement intersection without a signal because it is so
close to the intersection at Timberline & Harmony. Alternatives for getting to Heiney's home on
Timberline Lane when heading south on Timberline are to go south to Caribou and make a u-turn or
take a right in/right out of the shopping center. It's not an ideal situation, but with Timberline
designated as a six -lane arterial, the traffic management options are limited to those proposed.
Shepard reported the detention pond was recently regraded and will be reformed and recontoured to
be wider and deeper as a part of the Walgreens building permit. There is no ground cover at this
time. When work is completed and ground cover added it will be large enough to handle run off from
this and future development.
Member Rollins asked if street standards require that a full median run from Timberline to Caribou.
Yes standards do require that but until funding is identified either through capital projects or street
oversizing, a full length median has not been installed.
Member Schmidt made a motion the Planning & Zoning Board approve Modification 3.5.4 (c )
(3)( c) based on the fact that it would not be detrimental to the public good and staff findings 2
through 5 listed on page 13 of the Staff Report. Member Wetzler seconded the motion.
The motion passed 7:0.
Member Schmidt made a motion to approve Harmony School Shops 0 Filing Major
Amendment and 6"' Filing Replat, # 42-89L based on the Findings of Fact on pages 15 and 16
of the Staff Report. Member Smith seconded the motion.
Planning & Zoning Board
April 19, 2007
Page 11
Chair Lingle thought the major amendment design over what had previously submitted had been
much improved. He especially appreciated the work with staff on improved pedestrian access.
The motion passed 7:0.
Other Business:
None.
Meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
I