Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 05/21/2020Jeff Hansen, Chair Virtual Hearing Michelle Haefele, Vice Chair City Council Chambers Michael Hobbs 300 Laporte Avenue Per Hogestad Fort Collins, Colorado David Katz Jeff Schneider Cablecast on FCTV Channel 14 & William Whitley Channel 881 on Comcast The City of Fort Collins will make reasonable accommodations for access to City services, programs, and activities and will make special communication arrangements for persons with disabilities. Please call 221-6515 (TDD 224- 6001) for assistance. Regular Hearing May 21, 2020 Chair Hansen called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Roll Call: Haefele, Hansen, Hobbs, Hogestad, Katz, Schneider, Whitley Absent: None Staff Present: Everette, Yatabe, Tatman-Burruss, Scheidenhelm, Wilkinson, Bzdek, Wray, Smith, Sizemore and Manno Chair Hansen provided background on the board’s role and what the audience could expect as to the order of business. He described the following procedures: • Virtual participation instruction and viewing. • While the City staff provides comprehensive information about each project under consideration, citizen input is valued and appreciated. • The Board is here to listen to citizen comments. Each citizen may address the Board once for each item. • Decisions on development projects are based on judgment of compliance or non-compliance with city Land Use Code. • This is a legal hearing, and the Chair will moderate for the usual civility and fairness to ensure that everyone who wishes to speak can be heard. Agenda Review Development Review Manager Everette reviewed the items on the Consent and Discussion agendas, stating that all items will be heard as originally advertised. Public input: Planning and Zoning Board Minutes Planning & Zoning Board May 21, 2020 Page 2 of 7 Due to virtual hearing, no public participation was conducted. Consent Agenda: 1. Trail Head Neighborhood Park Secretary Manno reported that a memo from the applicant addressing concerns expressed at the work session regarding differences in architecture was received. Public Input on Consent Agenda: None noted Chair Hansen did a final review of the items that are on consent and reiterated that those items will not have a separate presentation unless pulled from the consent agenda. Member Katz made a motion that the Planning and Zoning Board approve the May 21st Consent agenda consisting of the Trail Head Neighborhood Park. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Hobbs seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0 Discussion Agenda: 2. Funshine Early Childhood Project Project Description: This is a request for a Project Development Plan to convert an existing building from the last known use of a place of worship to a childcare center (parcel #9602406006). The project proposes the removal of two parking spots to accommodate trash enclosure and new parking configuration with a total of ten parking spaces remaining. Access is taken from Cameron Dr. to the south. The property is within the General Commercial (CG) zone district and is subject to Planning and Zoning Board (Type 2) Review. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported that letters of opposition from Dr. Carla Irven and Dr. John Smith, owners of a nearby business, citing concerns for traffic and their business. Included responses from Traffic Engineer, Martina Wilkinson. Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Beals gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project. Kate Penning, Architect, the Clark Enersen Partners, Steve Shalemburg, Owner, Devel Shalemburg Co-Owner, Shalah, Director of Funshine, provided a brief verbal/visual presentation. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Sue White, Prospect, questioned the lighting in regard to the hours of operations and lighting locations. Staff Response Planner Beals responded to citizen comment regarding lighting. The lighting is in compliance. The reduction in lighting is in the playground area. Children will not be in the play areas after dark. Play areas will also be locked down so that no one can enter the site. Board Questions / Deliberation Planning & Zoning Board May 21, 2020 Page 3 of 7 Parking lot - Queuing questions were responded to; Customers will park, drop off and then leave. A compact vs. standard parking spot, compact is reduced sizing compared to a standard spot which is 9’ x 19’. Any reduction from the 9’ x 19’ is considered compact up to a certain point. In this instance just the length was reduced. Previous use of the building was a church. Originally approved as an office before becoming a church. Right-of-way and plantings were discussed. The right-of-way goes to the back of the sidewalk, there will be no opportunity for plantings unless in the right-of-way. This is permittable, following Engineering standards. Facility entry and exit – It is felt that the entry is wide enough to facility the sharper turn in, however, most will enter from the other direction on Cameron Dr. If this is a concern, the entry can be widened. Clarification, entrance on the South end of the Dr., meaning you will take a left hand turn into the parking lot, which is tighter than 90º. Traffic Engineering did review and approve as is. Cameron Dr. has additional width to allow for vehicles to make the turn without issue. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve modification #1, Section 3.2.2(J) Landscape Setback 10’ from parking area any more than 6 spaces on an arterial street. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Katz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0 Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve modification #2, Section 3.2.2(L)(1) Parking lot stall dimensional requirements for a one-way drive aisle be 20’ in length. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Katz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0 Member Whitley made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve modification #3, Section 3.2.2(L)(2) Compact legal spaces are limited to 40% of the parking spaces. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Katz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0 Member Whitley made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve modification #4, Section 3.2.4(C) Lighting levels for a playground are required at a minimum of 5” candles. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Katz seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0 Member Whitley made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the Funshine Early Childhood Center PDP200002. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Katz seconded the motion. Member Hobbs and Chair Hansen will be supporting the project as concerns with traffic have been satisfied. Vote: 7:0 3. Mulberry Connection Project Description: This is a Project Development Plan (P.D.P.) to develop two industrial buildings on a portion of land abutting the north side of Redman Dr (parcel#8709000042). The proposal includes landscaping, a 238- space parking lot, 12 bike parking spaces, outdoor amenity areas, frontage road improvements, and internal sidewalks. The request includes a Modification of Standard and is located within the Industrial (I) zone district, which requires Planning & Zoning Board (Type 2) review. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported that no new information has been received. Planning & Zoning Board May 21, 2020 Page 4 of 7 Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Kleer gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project. Josh Heine, Comunale Properties, also provided a brief verbal/visual presentation. Public Input (3 minutes per person) None noted Staff Response None noted Board Questions / Deliberation Planner Kleer responded to clarifying questions on building height and truck court; these items are legal under the I-25 Corridor Plan. Redmond Dr. is a private drive and if the drive is needed to access, they would be a party of interest. These interests maintain the drive. The 30’ offset to the property line is more than what is required– minimum offset required would likely be a 5’ side yard setback. Planner Kleer would need to do research to know what the exact setback out be. There is a signage requirement. A separate permit is required for a sign permit and will be reviewed in accordance with the I-25 Corridor Standards. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve the modification for Section 3.9.3(C) 60% or less building frontage requirement. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Katz seconded the motion. Member Katz thanked the applicant and he feels Ft. Collins needs a product like this. Member Haefele feels this makes sense. Chair Hansen appreciates the work put into the project. Vote: 7:0. Member Hobbs made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board approve PDP190015 Mulberry Connection. This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Whitley seconded the motion. Member Schneider appreciates the applicants site design. Member Hogestad feels they have gone beyond for an industrial building. He appreciates the articulation and materials in the panels. Chair Hansen agreed with Per. Vote: 7:0 4. Apex-Haven Apartments Project Description: This is a request for a Project Development Plan (PDP) to develop a three-story multi-family building, adaptive re-use of the two existing homes, and replat of Parcel 9714321001 and Parcel 9714321002 into a single lot. The project is located within the High-Density Mixed-Use Neighborhoods (H-M-N) zone district and requires a (Type 2) review. Recommendation: Approval Secretary Manno reported that the following citizen emails had been received: • Jim Swanstrom sent materials that will be presented at the hearing during his speaking time. • Denise Doctor has concerns of privacy, noise, destruction or disrespectfulness of her property and views of wildlife. Planning & Zoning Board May 21, 2020 Page 5 of 7 • Two emails from Robin Bachelet. First stating that she believes board member Hogestad has a conflict of interest on this item. Second stating that this project is a best-case scenario for this land, but is not needed at this time if burdensome, and they can step aside for a national student housing group to come in and take over. Member Hogestad does not feel he has a conflict of interest and that he can be fair and impartial in his deliberations. Member Schneider asked what protocol was since it was not a Board member coming forward. Attorney Yatabe responded that it was up to the individual Board member to make an analysis as to whether there is a conflict of interest or not. Staff and Applicant Presentations Planner Wray gave a brief verbal/visual overview of this project. Shelly Lemaster provided a brief verbal and visual presentation. Public Input (3 minutes per person) Jim Swanstrom, 638 W. Prospect. He is not happy with the size of the building, vegetation that is screening his and his neighbor’s properties and privacy. He is against the reduction of the buffer. Diane Zack, 714 W. Prospect. She opposes any modifications to standards and is concerned with privacy. The building should not be built so close to the property line. Michael and Julian Christianson, 719 W. Prospect. Would like to know the status of Prospect Road. Will there be a crosswalk? There needs to be trust with the City when purchasing land. Sue White, 714 W. Prospect. Reiterated what others have said. She does not want any damage to happen to the old oak tree. She is concerned about fire exposure. Denise Doctor, 714 W. Prospect. Her issues are privacy, lighting, noise, constant construction work, loss of view and destruction of property. Staff Response Planner Wray, Mrs. Lemaster and Ian responded to questions regarding density and if the decision was financial and not based on land use code. Mrs. Lemaster reiterated to the board the land use code regarding buffer yard. Vegetation will be added to help mitigate and work has been completed with Forestry to help protect existing trees. Traffic engineering has reviewed all street plans; the trees will remain. The South side line will remain. With the new trail going in the property owner were asked to provide 10’ right-of-way. There will be an anticipated crossing further to the West, though this has not yet been determined. The building cannot be placed in the parking lot. There is also stormwater below grade, to the East and West of the parking lot. They have been working with the trash hauling company for a new enclosure. There will be no impact to the property from the height of the new building. The lighting complies at zero-foot candles, meet code and are warm colors. All plans have been reviewed by PFA and meet requirements. A modification to the landscaping would be considered regarding landscaping. The addition of more trees could happen to increase privacy. Board Questions / Deliberation Clarification on if the trees would survive within a 10’ narrow strip, and what the height of the trees are at full grown status. Forestry has reviewed and approved. The 10’ easement may have utilities located within and this too has been approved. There is the possibility that the trees will grow together. The canopies of this type of evergreen tree have a smaller canopy. The stucco on the building is a concrete mixture. A window study is being conducted. LPC has reviewed. Bldg. 3, this is currently a place holder. Planning & Zoning Board May 21, 2020 Page 6 of 7 The retention pond grew to the West and then got smaller; this did not increase the depth. The depth will be 30” with a vertical landscape wall. Member Hobbs feels it is unreasonable to imagine that enough vegetation density could be achieved in a 10’ strip to mitigate the privacy issues. Member Haefele feels it is unreasonable to take away the single-family home designation and does not feel the vegetation will survive and create any type of buffer. Member Hogestad commented on the scale and mass of the new building. He feels it has been done very well and is pleasing. He would like to know if there are comments regarding survivability. Planning Manger Everette responded that there were no responses from forestry regarding survivability. But rather protection and specific trees. They also did not comment on the health of specific trees as this is not something that is done off site, only the trees onsite. With the proximity of neighboring trees, they were included due to boring and construction. Member Haefele questioned why the comments were not included in the report. Planning Manager Everett responded that staff could discuss with the board. Staff could supply the comment letters if the board would like to have added to their packets and is posted online. Attorney Yatabe commented that the Board can request further information from staff the Board has the ability to continue the hearing and ask staff to provide more information. Member Katz appreciates the applicant’s efforts. They exercise moderation. Overall, he likes the projects and is getting comfortable with the modification but remains on the fence. He would like to see a bigger buffer. Member Schneider wondered if the board was trying to say that forestry was wrong in their review. Staff responded that all reviewing parties must review and grant approval before an applicant to go before the Planning and Zoning Board. He has no objections with the modification at this point. Member Whitley is conflicted. He agrees with member Hogestad in that the building fits well. He is concerned with the buffer and the vegetation. Member Katz made a motion that the Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board adapt the findings by City staff for the Apex Haven Apartments in reference to Section 3.8.30(F)(1). This approval is based on the agenda materials, information and materials presented at the work session and this hearing, any Board discussion and all of staff’s notes and recommendations. Member Hobbs commented on the “Hobby farm feel”, the height of the building. He does not agree with this modification, it is not an example of greater to or better than. He will not be supporting the motion. Member Hogestad agrees with Member Hobbs and will not be supporting the motion. Member Whitley, like other board members likes the project but cannot support the modification. Member Katz agrees with Member Hobbs. We must look at the big picture and this type of project is coming. Member Hafele will not be supporting this modification. However, it is an attractive project. Member Katz commented on development expansion and the expectation of projects in this area. This is going to be a short- term win for the landowners, but just that, short term. Chair Hansen spoke to the conflict or protecting the property owners and landowners that want to develop. Member Whitley seconded. Vote 3:4. The project was withdrawn by the applicant. For more complete details on this hearing, please view our video recording located here: https://www.fcgov.com/fctv/video-archive.php?search=PLANNING%20ZONING Other Business None noted Adjournment Chair Hansen moved to adjourn the P&Z Board hearing. The meeting was adjourned at 11:55p.m. Planning & Zoning Board May 21, 2020 Page 7 of 7 Minutes respectfully submitted by Shar Manno. Minutes approved by a vote of the Board on: ____________. Rebecca Everette, Development Review Manager Jeff Hansen, Chair 6-18-20