Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMASON STREET NORTH - MAJOR AMENDMENT - 4-97B - P&Z PACKET - MINUTES/NOTESI Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 21 Member Colton recommended approval of Modification request for Section 4.4(E)(2)(c) for height. He cited staffs finding B and C. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0. Member Colton moved for approval of the Mason Street North Major Amendment, #4-98B with two conditions: 1. The developer must provide (to the City for review and approval) sufficient design of a proposed median, with pedestrian refuge, in Cherry Street mid -block between North Mason Street and North Howes Street. This median will align with the proposed pedestrian spine in the Mason Street North development plan and the pedestrian spine to the south of Cherry Street as part of the City's Downtown Civic Center Master Plan. The design of the median must be accepted by the City prior to the final Mason Street North development plan being approved, recorded, and filed. 2. That the Plat for the project be drawn to include all of the 6 space parking lot facility and related sidewalk and pedestrian trail located to the northwest of the Mason Court cul-de-sac. Member Bernth seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0. Project: Larimer County Courthouse, Site Plan Advisory Review, #37-98C Project Description: Request for a new 150,000 s.f. office building that will replace the current Larimer County Offices Building at 200 West Oak Street. The building will be five stories, with a tower element of 104 feet in height. The property is zoned D, Downtown, and is within the Civic Center Subdistrict. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 20 Mr. Stanford replied there is a very good chance there will be a signal there in the future. Member Gavaldon asked about traffic calming measures on Cherry Street to get the speeds down to the posted 25 mph. Mr. Stanford replied that the city has been working for several years with that whole area. He has not been included in that but is aware of what they done. He did not think it was appropriate to speculate what they are doing as a team to do that. Member Gavaldon still feels that there are some safety concerns with the speed and he relies on city staff to help drive that speed down and put in better traffic calming measures. This development is going to have some impacts. Member Craig asked about only having 2 handicapped parking spaces for three buildings and did that meet ADA. Also there was a wheelchair parking space in the off parking lot and could they get over the railroad tracks? Planner Olt replied that they would be subject to the parking standards in providing handicapped spaces for the number of parking spaces in the lot. He would have to check with the Building Department and see if they are in compliance. The developer reviewed for the Board the parking requirements and how they have accommodated the handicapped spaces. Member Colton recommended approval of the Modification of Section 3.5.3(B)(2)(b) — Orientation to Build to Lines for Street front Buildings. Citing staffs findings of fact on Page 14, point C, that the project as submitted based on the land use and architectural compatibility of the surrounding areas is not detrimental to the public good. He cited point D, that by reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to this property, the strict application of the standard would result in exceptional practical difficulties and impose a hardship on the owner/developer of the property. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 19 Member Gavaldon asked if it was typical to let something like this come through and no pedestrian median put in place. Dave Stringer, Development Review Engineering replied that when staff gets plans ready for a PDP, they don't normally have them 100% complete, we at what we call 90% complete. Staff felt that the ultimate design of this median was really part of the 10% that we would get after hearing and work out the finite details of what staff really wants that median to look like. Member Gavaldon asked about the signage of the Lee Martinez entrance being moved from the Howes and Cherry median to the new median. If you look at the median that is on Howes, that is Lee Martinez Parks entrance and not being sure what is going to happen here, he sees a difference in scale and scope. It concerns him to not have a design and he would be very interested if the city and the developer could work with the Lee Martinez Park neighborhood in getting the parks support in moving the entrance of the signage to the new median which will blend all the neighborhoods to the park and give it that beautiful gateway look. Mr. Stringer replied he felt that was something they could do and the city installed the median at Howes Street as well as the sign. That was done in conjunction with the traffic calming measures that were done on Cherry Street. Member Craig asked Mr. Stanford to address the existing level of service on Cherry Street as it is right now and the in and out on Mason Street to Cherry and Mason Court to Cherry. Ward Stanford, Traffic Operations replied that in looking at the Civic Center traffic study that was done for this overall area and the studies that were done for this project, all of them are coming in with a basic agreement on current levels of service being anywhere in the neighborhood of A and C. The access as it stands now; Mason does not add tremendous traffic to that corridor yet. Most of the traffic comes off of College or from up around the Vine area. In time as these developments will be adding traffic, the studies do come to agreement that in the long term, probably the worst movement at that intersection will be the left out from that development. Short term projections look to maintain around a level of service C. Long term it looks to move to a level of service E, which is still acceptable to our city standards for a stop sign controlled intersection. That comes with the growth of the Civic Center and all the downtown development that the city is proposing to take place. Member Craig asked if the intersection could ever be signalized Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 18 anyone from the city or the development team as far as traffic patterns goes and anything they can do to mitigate the fast traffic through there. He stated that he is proud to be a part of this and proud to part of the neighborhood. Don Flick, 520 North Sherwood stated he felt really good about this change for mixed -use. Visually, with the changes the way it is going to look and feel when it is completed is a really nice improvement over the original design. He urged the Board to approve the change. Member Craig asked about Mason Street Court from Cherry to the housing units that are already developed, was that road originally going to be public or private. Planner Olt replied that Mason Street Court from Cherry to the existing cul-de- sac was and is publicly dedicated. From the cul-de-sac west through the "s" curve and along the single family lots was always intended to be a private drive. Member Craig asked where the parking is for the softball fields now. Planner Olt replied that the parking will be interspersed. You will see parking lots north of building C, which is the building furthest west. The parking spaces to the north of that and the parking spaces west, a portion of the parking spaces to the east of building C, between buildings B and C, and a portion if not all of the parking lot on the south side of the railroad tracks. Member Craig asked what kind of pedestrian walkway would be over the railroad tracks. Planner Olt replied that at this point in time, it would be some kind of informal access. The developers have attempted working with the railroad to attempt to get a public access across the tracks and have not been successful to date. Initially that will be an "ad lib" crossing from that parking lot to the south onto the pedestrian spine next to building C. Member Gavaldon asked about the condition for the median crosswalk and why did they not have the design now. Katie Moore, Development Review Engineering replied that in the first round of review all they showed was an outline of where they proposed the median to be. Staff's first comments requested further information and design information about the median, including enlarging the median. There second round of review showed the same median with a note stating that it would be developed at a later time in conjunction with the Downtown Development Association. !. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 17 ended up getting some great support from the Downtown Development Authority who is looking for these kinds of opportunities. They do have funds available to try and encourage developers to do the right thing and get energy going into the downtown. They like this project and they have committed about $250,000 to various kinds of pedestrian improvements that will enhance the public spaces that he has talked about. They have also worked with the Parks Department on their issue of parking for the softball fields. That resulted in a plan that they certainly helped to shape with some additional parking being placed next to the park. Mr. Wolf also discussed the architecture of the buildings and in every case the first floor of the buildings is commercial. Public Input Delores Williams who is a neighbor of one of the 10 single family homes between the co -housing and the proposed development. She commended the development as beautiful and that it is an asset to downtown and the city of Fort Collins. She has only one concern and that is the private drive. She was concerned with the drive being private and that a blanket insurance policy should be shared to cover the cost in case of accidents. Rick Price, President of Experience Plus Specialty Tours and he and his wife own Lot 1. He felt that they were extraordinarily lucky to have found this team of folks to come up and develop this extraordinarily complicated development and is really going to be a world class addition to downtown Fort Collins. This particular development application to change one massive 35,000 s.f. structure and splitting it up into three different structures is a great step forward. The project to begin with is a great idea. He is delighted that Wonderland Hills has decided to stick with the whole thing and do phase three. They are still concerned about traffic on the private lane. He is confident that with the. three different administrations, the homeowners, the developers and the co -housing group, they will be able to create an umbrella organization to manage that street. Heather Manera, 411 N. Meldrum Street in the Martinez neighborhood stated that she appreciated the developers coming out to their neighborhood meeting and talking with them about the project. She also appreciates them having a local representative. She felt there would some issues with traffic on Cherry Street. She does not think that there will be an increase in traffic because she does not think that the neighborhood traffic that creates the speeding problem. Ken Smith, 415 Mason Court and President of the Martinez Park Homeowners Association stated that they are all extremely pleased to have this sort of anchor on the north side of the property. He felt it would only enhance their property and add to the quality of life there. He stated that they were willing to work with Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 16 1g1h of February actual dedication of this property to the developer to complete these improvements. However, it is necessary to include that into the subdivision plat that will ultimately be recorded with the Mason Street North. There needs to be a condition at the time of a motion on the project that'will state the subdivision plat for Mason Street North will have to include to portion of Martinez Park that would enable the portion of trail and sidewalk around the parking lot to be completed. Jim Leach, President of Wonderland Development Company gave the applicants presentation and stated that they were a co -developer of the project. Mr. Leach gave a brief background of the Mason Street project. He stated that their original plan was to sell the mixed -use site that had one large building on it and the parking lot. In the process of working through the development they discovered that there were a lot of constraints of the property. They then came up with this plan to split it into a number of buildings. To make all this work, they have had to work through a lot of constraints with city staff. What they are doing from a community based approach, they have already started to have workshops with future residents and business owners that may be occupying this site. The twenty housing units will be owner occupied. The commercial properties, all the tenants have an opportunity to own a share in the commercial. They will maintain ownership as developers, as will the architects so they all have a vested interest in making this work over the long run. They have had a couple of neighborhood meetings in the process. In both meetings there was very good support for the project. The only issue that came up is a small private drive that goes from the project going north past the co - housing and the 10 single family lots and the potential for additional traffic. The traffic is not significantly different from what they had before, but there is an issue with that. They have been talking with the two associations most affected about a joint maintenance agreement since it is a private drive. John Wolf, architect on the project and a co -developer of the project stated that when they approached this, they wanted to break the building mass into many entities. The reason for that is to shape the public space around the buildings. That is their primary interest and in placing the buildings the way they have, he felt that they have created some outdoor rooms and have created a sense of place that will endure over time. The road is already in place and Mason Court has not been changed in anyway. Another objective that they were able to address is the Mason Street Corridor Plan, there is a pedestrian plan for Mason Street and they saw an opportunity to connect the park to the improvements that are being made along Mason Street. There are some properties that will hopefully, will fill in over time, but the pedestrian network will now be enhanced by taking it through from Mason Street to Martinez Park. With that in mind, they Planning and Zoning Board Minutes January 17, 2002 Page 15 Project: Mason Street North Major Amendment, #4-97B Project Description: Major Amendment to Lot 12 and Tract A of the Martinez PUD. The proposed development will consist of three 2-story, mixed -use buildings, with associated parking, on 2.22 acres. The total floor area of the three buildings will be 42,050 square feet, and 2,672 s.f. of office/retail uses. Building B will contain 8 residential dwelling units, totaling 9,677 s.f. and 7,118 s.f. of office/retail uses. Building C will contain 8 residential dwelling units, totaling 10,537 s.f. and 6,894 s.f. of office/retail uses. The property is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Mason Court and Cherry Street, approximately 700' west of North College Avenue, ease of North Howes Street, and is zoned LMN, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood Zoning District. Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence Steve Olt, City Planner gave the staff presentation. He stated that there were also two modification requests for the project. There is also one condition of approval: 1. The developer must provide (to the City for review and approval) sufficient design of a proposed median, with pedestrian refuge, in Cherry Street mid -block between North Mason Street and North Howes Street. This median will align with the proposed pedestrian spine in the Mason Street North development plan and the pedestrian spine to the south of Cherry Street as part of the City's Downtown Civic Center Master Plan. The design of the median must be accepted by the City prior to the final Mason Street North development plan being approved, recorded, and filed. As recently as this afternoon, staff has been made aware that there is a portion of the Project Development Plan that will encroach into Martinez Park. It would involve a small section of sidewalk around a parking lot and completion of a trail connection in Martinez Park. These are currently outside of the property boundary for Mason Street North. The city Parks Department and the developer for Mason Street North are in the process of taking to City Council on the 5f'' and Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat Chairperson: Jerry Gavaldon Vice Chair: Mika] Torgerson Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss Phone: (H) 484-2034 Phone: (W) 416-7435 Chairperson Gavaldon called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. Roll Call: Bernth, Craig, Torgerson, Carpenter, Colton, and Gavaldon. Member Meyer was absent. Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Joy, Wamhoff, Reavis, Reiff, Jackson, Shepard, Barkeen, Olt, Stringer, Phillips, Stanford, Moore and Deines. Election of Officers: Member Carpenter nominated Member Gavaldon for Chairperson. Member Craig nominated Member Torgerson for Chairperson. There we no other comments. The vote tied 3-3. Member Colton moved to postpone election of officers until the February 7, 2002 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting. Member Craig seconded the motion. The vote was approved 6-0. Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: 1. #36-96F Mulberry — Lemay Crossings, Phase Three, K.F.C./Taco Bell — Project Development Plan. 2. #43-01 Webster Farm Annexation & Zoning. 3. #33-01 Fossil Lake Annexation No. 1 (Continued) 4. #33-01A Fossil Lake Annexation No. 2 (Continued) 5. #33-01B Fossil Lake Annexation No. 3 (Continued) Discussion Agenda: 6. Recommendation to City Council for the South College Access Plan Update. 7. #4-97B Mason Street North — Major Amendment 8. #37-98C Larimer County Courthouse Offices — Site Plan Advisory Review. Other Business: 9. Resolution PZ02-01 — Easement Vacation