Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSPRING CREEK FARMS NORTH - AMENDED ODP - ODP110001 - DECISION - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARINGPlap ing & Zoning Board April 21, 2011 Page 4 cannot do it for every residential street intersecting an arterial. Hoaglund said he'd like to add that Eastwood drive is about % mile from this project. Member Campana made a motion to approve the amendment to the Spring Creek Farms North Overall Development Plan, #ODP110001 based on the Findings of Facts/Conclusions on page 5 of the staff report. Member Smith seconded the motion. Member Schmidt said she can see both sides of this issue. She can see where the land owner needs to have a little more flexibility besides single family house to deal with a buffer at the railroad tracks and being next to the Police station. She thinks traffic will be an issue and that's, something we'll just have to be prepared to address in any PDP that comes forward. Member Lingle said that initially he was uncomfortable with this because of�not,knowing why commitments were made. He said there were probably some very'good reasons'including neighborhood input. He also agrees with Member Schmidt that the way this'has;developed with, the Police facility and the need for some additional buffering that was not contemplated at'that time. He's,,, okay with supporting this proposal. The motion was passed 7:0 ; Member Carpenter returned to the hearing. ` i i Planning'& Zoning Board April 21, 2011 Page 3 Betty Winberg lives at 1737 Eastwood Court. She attended a meeting some time ago held at Timberline Church. Her concern is for the children who would go to Riffenburgh Elementary and how they would get over the railroad tracks. She said the traffic is already very bad out there. She said she cannot make a left turn onto Drake most days. She said she was told by a young woman, who she thought was a representative of the City that nothing was going to done there because the City was going to eventually get rid of all the automobiles and everyone was going to ride a bicycle. Ms. Winberg said she asked what about those that did not want to ride a bicycle to which the young lady responded they could use public transportation. Ms. Winberg hopes the young lady was incorrect. She said (as a senior), she cannot see giving up automobiles. End of Public Input Board Discussion �- Chair Stockover said we don't have the ability to do away with automobiles in'the near future. Director Dush said he'd like to reiterate that the next stepin.the process, if approved, is an application for a Project Development Plan (PDP). With its submittal there would be notice, a neighborhood meeting and a public hearing. All the uses and the site plan would be dentified•and people would have a chance to take a look at that. He also said that if individuals would-like4o provide,their names, when those documents are available we'd be happy to make sure they have access to the information. Member Schmidt asked if the applicant sees Parcel A as developing all,at one time. Hoaglund said he really can't address that right now. The landowner would like to sell'it and depending on who comes on board would determine how it would be developed: _,Member Schmidt asked;if it was phased would they need to amend the ODP. Director Dush said he'd have to check the Code as to the variety of ways it could work. Hoaglund said when Police Services purchased -the land; -they bought a piece of what was Parcel M-1 and the PDP was for that alone. DirectorDush said at the PDP stage, staff would review the proposal (if it was submitted in subcomponents) for connectivity. Member Campana said he did not necessarily have an issue with opening it up to all uses but he keeps thinking that for a developer to -have agreed to restrictions. (single family or duplex), they must have been some negotiating on the ODP. He asked if there was any historical background. Hoaglund said that was before his time but there was a speck development,proposal for the whole property called Mansion Park. That-Kad a mix of multi -family, single family, and duplexes. He said that project "died" before it even got to the hearing stage`,Campana said he's comfortable deliberating with current conditions. Member -Lingle asked if it wouldn't be better to see the ODP at the same time as the PDP so they can evaluate whether the ODP shouldbe amended based on the PDP as they have for other projects. Campana said.that's a good point but some of this ODP has already been developed the other projects in which the ODP�and PDP came in together were where no development had taken place. Member Schmidt said on the ODP there appears to be a drive that comes onto Drake. Is that distanced far enough so if needed'there could be a traffic light at Eastwood. How do we envision traffic would flow? Traffic Operations -staff member Ward Stanford said it's a possibility but it's probably far enough away to not interfere negatively with Drake and Timberline. It would have to have significant warrants and exhaust other measures before they would consider it. Member Schmidt asked if we needed to have a street from the property under consideration onto Drake. Ward said density and porosity are good things. Ward said to be adding signals frequently would degrade the whole system. They do not choose to put a signal in without a lot of consideration and Planning & Zoning Board April 21, 2011 Page 2 Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence Member Carpenter, who had previously indicated she had a conflict, left the hearing. Planning Tech Courtney Rippy said The Spring Creek Farms North Amended O.D.P. continues to comply with the applicable criteria contained in the Land Use Code and the modifications (2001) and the minor amendment granted (2004) are incorporated into the amended O.D.P. and remain valid. She said the land uses proposed on the amended O.D.P., specifically the allowance of all L-M-N uses on Parcel Al and A2, are permitted in accordance to the standards set forth in Section.4'of the Land Use Code. Applicant's Presentation Terrance Hoaglund, Vignette Studios, said he did not have anything,additional to add. He said their request is to add a use —it is currently zoned LMN and it will remain LMN.'Th6`existing uses are single family, duplex, and single-family attached. They are subject to the Land Use Code,(LUC) for density requirements. With the additional uses, they would still be subjectt.to the LUC densities. He said the original ODP was structured around a specific project at that time that had single family,and duplex in Parcel A. That particular developer went out of business many years ago and the property owner has been marketing the existing property with existing use's -without luck. ;The railroad tracks are -one impediment. The location of the Police facility is also an impediment'to single family. The owner would like to have additional uses to market the property and get it'developed. Public Input `. Nancy Wurst lives at 2406 Eastwood Drive. She said -she had concern about more density in this area. Theirs is a residential street and people use ttiei� streefto,access EPIC\,Riffenburgh Elementary, and the Parkwood East Apartments. From the neighborhood meetings they've had, if approved, it looks like the density is going to increase greatly in that area. She said;people disregard the stop signs on Eastwood Drive all the time. She has real -concerns especially,for children but for all residents. She doesn't think there's a way to close off Eastwood Drive at the Packwood East Apartments so they would have to access another way (via Prospect Avenue). She asked the Board to consider that. Steve Ettien lives at 2242\Eastwood Drive —he lives acr ss from the property under consideration. He's wondering what exactly is being proposed?- He's also,wondering how the traffic will flow out of the development. He said -there's not much space. between the railroad tracks and Timberline to allow for much traffic to flow. -Chair Stockover said that would all be addressed when we looked at a specific project./ �� A Director Dush,said what this request relates to LMN (mixed used -neighborhood) zoning. This is not a change in the zone district. There are other uses allowed in the LMN zone district. The applicant is asking for all the uses allowed in LMN. If that is approved, the next step is for an application to come in that would identify, the specific uses, the locations of the roads, and traffic volumes. Staff would then be able to get to the specks as they relate to Mr. Ettien's questions regarding traffic patterns and volumes. Ettien asked if there'd be an opportunity to speak to it. Dush said the PDP would require notice, a neighborhood meeting, and a public hearing. Member Lingle said that while there would be additional public hearings, this change would allow for residential uses up to an 8-plex. Lingle said that right now only single family and duplex are allowed. Director Dush said what would be allowed are single-family detached, two family dwellings, single family attached, multi -family up to 8 dwelling units, group homes up to 8 developmentally disabled or elderly persons, mixed use buildings, and extra occupancy rental homes with more than 4 tenants. In addition to the residential uses there are the institutional uses (civic and public), commercial and retail uses. Council Liaison: Lisa Poppaw Staff Liaison: Steve Dush Chair: William Stockover Phone: (H) 482-7994 Chair Stockover called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. Roll Call: Campana, Carpenter, Hatfield, Lingle, Schmidt, Smith, and Stockover Staff Present: Dush, Eckman, Rippy, Shepard, Joy, Stanford, Virata, and Sanchez - Sprague Agenda Review Director Dush reviewed the agenda. Citizen participation: Eric Sutherland, 3520 Golden Currant... Consent Agenda: 1 _ Minutes for the March 17, 2011 Planning & Zoning Board Hearings Member Schmidt made a motion to approve the Consent Agenda including minutes from the April 21, 2011 Hearing. Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7:0. Discussion Agenda: 2. Spring Creek Farms North Amended Overall Development Plan, # ODP110003 3. Pura Vida Place Project Development Plan, # PDP110003 4. CSU —Washington School —Addition of Permitted Use and Site Plan Advisory Review, #SPA11001 Project: Spring Creek Farms North Amend Overall Development Plan, # ODP110003 Project Description: This is a request for an amendment to the Spring Creek Farms North Overall Development Plan (O.D.P.) to allow all Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood Zone District (L-M-N) uses. Currently, the approved O.D.P. specifically calls out single family residential: attached and detached as well as two family dwellings as the L-M-N uses for Parcel A. The site is located at the northwest corner of East Drake Road and South Timberline Road and is bound by South Timberline Road to the east, East Drake Road to the south, the Union Pacific Railroad tracks to the west.. and existing industrial uses to the north. The site has three zoning districts: Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood District, (M-M-N); Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood District, (L-M-N), and Employment District, (E). Recommendation: Approval