Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRESIDIO APARTMENTS - PDP - 25-09 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 19 Member Rollins seconded the motion. Member Lingle said he's not going to support this motion —not because he doesn't think they made a valiant effort. He said he as to deal with getting his arms around "this thing" every day. He calls Shepard with questions every week. He's reading of the requirements, specifically the purpose statement for 3.2.2. for access circulation and parking, where it says this section is intended to insure that the parking and circulation aspects of developments are well designed (paraphrasing) both within the development and to/from surrounding areas. He just doesn't find that this meets that and he can't support it for that reason. Member Rollins said she will be supporting it. She looks at the various types of options with having the buildings on the outside and trying to accomplish parking internally. All the paths that she's look at there are much nicer than some of her personal experience at a grocery store parking lot. She would respectfully disagree with Lingle and thinks they've done an exceptional job from a pedestrian's perspective. Chair Schmidt said she will be supporting the PDP because she thinks they've done the best they can with this. She'd like to get feedback from the applicant in the future should this plan not work as well as other complexes they operate. She thinks it could have been changed a little and that's why she didn't vote for the modification. If she was renting, she's not sure how useful a garage would be because you'd still want to park in front of your unit to unload and then you'd have to move your car. If you're doing that late in the evening, she would be somewhat worried about that. She said, as Member Campana said; you're in the business and she thinks you probably do the best you can. She will be supporting the PDP. The motion passed 6:1 with Lingle dissenting. Other Business: None Meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Steve Dush, Current Planning Director Brigitte Schmidt, Chair Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 18 Chair Schmidt asked if staff live in various units around the complex. Kicken said yes. He said most of their staff is between the ages of 27 and 32 years of age and are some of the most effective in the industry. He thinks they relate well to the residents. Kicken said as far as relates to the detention pond, Nick of Northern Engineering is looking into whether they'd be allowed to place picnic tables, trash receptacles, and even a play ground there. Chair Schmidt said she agrees with his appreciation of evergreen trees. They do grow, in some cases, a little more slowly than the deciduous trees. It would be nice to see as large a tree planted in the front of the buildings to buffer the height of the building. Anderson said one of the things they've done is try to put a double row of trees 6 to 8 feet high along the roads and entrances. Schmidt said she's thinking the neighbors who live in high rises further away will not get the road view as much as an upper level. The third story will appear tall until the trees get a little bigger there. She said if they're diligent at watering, they'll probably grow pretty fast. Kicken said he'd be amenable to adding taller trees on Cinquefoil. Member Campana asked when they refer to 50% open space do they mean landscaped areas. Anderson said yes —any thing that is not hardscaped is considered open space. Member Campana made a motion to approve the modification of standard Section 3.5.2(C)(1)(2) for Presidio Apartments PDP, # 25-09 based on the facts and findings on page 15, items F 1, 2 and 3 of the staff report (see below). Member Smith seconded the motion. The motion passed 6:1 with Schmidt dissenting. Member Campana made a motion to approve the Presidio Apartments PDP, # 25-09 based on the facts and findings on page 14, A-E of the staff report. A. The P.D.P. is located within the Harmony Corridor Plan and complies with the applicable Harmony Corridor Plan standards. C. The P.D.P. complies with the Harmony Corridor zone district standards for land use, site design, height, density, mix of housing and access to a central feature. D. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable General Development Standards with one exception. E. A Modification of Standard is required for Section 3.5.2(C)(1)(2) to allow Buildings 7,8,9 and 10 to have entrances that do not face the street and for Building 8 to have two entrances that are slightly further than 200 feet from the sidewalk along Lady Moon Drive. F. This Modification complies with the criteria of Section 2.8.2(H) in that: (1.)The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good. (2.)The P.D.P., as proposed, will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue to advance the Purpose Statement of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2. (3.)This is because the P.D.P., as proposed, with all buildings oriented to the street, is fundamentally in compliance with the purpose and intent of the standard. And, all buildings remain connected to the perimeter streets with walkways. Finally, the P.D.P., with the proposed Modification, implements a key finding derived from the citizen input process to soften the appearance of the three-story buildings as much as possible by installing earthen berms and additional plant material. This solution effectively accomplishes this objective and would otherwise not be possible with land area needed to for six connecting walkways. G. Two neighborhood meetings were held in October and December of 2008. There is opposition to the project based on traffic, neighborhood compatibility and occupancy by tenants versus owners. Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 17 had a photo metrics study that has been reviewed by staff. They understand it to be consistent with city guidelines as far as providing sufficient illumination but not having a nuisance glare off -site. Member Campana said in reference to Lingle's concerns regarding design, he understands they followed a path that they believed to be the intent of the code —to position buildings around the perimeter. He thinks they've done a great job and have provided great connectivity around the perimeter with the exception of the building for which they requested a modification. Because of your efforts on the perimeter, however, the Board raised a concern at the work session on how it's created circulation challenges on the inside. He believes the sense of place you pride yourself on almost seems like it's lost. He doesn't know how you resolve that —he doesn't know what can be changed. He does believe the applicant has tried to meet the intent of the code as much as possible. Kicken said this is the first time they've developed a community with the buildings on the perimeter. They usually mix it up but they followed the guidelines and what we thought they were being told by the City. Kicken said he thinks it's pretty cool and that's why they have above average landscaping on the ends of the garages (several layers with some garages having three layers of one foot ground cover, four foot shrub row as well as a tree canopy). Member Campana asked if they have any other live/work units in their other communities. Kicken said yes. He said they are semi -successful depending on where they're located in relation to retail areas. They see it more when they develop on high traffic corners. This is the first community where they are not on a street with a 50,000 car trips a day level. In other areas they have put up live/work signs for CPAs, lawyers, architects, chiropractors, etc. When it works well, residents use their services. They are not quite sure how successful it will be in this development. Chair Schmidt asked if residents use the garages for their car or for storage. Kicken said they control that —it's for cars. He said they have other storage options if needed. Chair Schmidt asked if there were bicycle racks. Kicken said yes. Adam Anderson of Henry Design Group indicated where they are located. Chair Schmidt asked if for Building 5 apartment dwellers had their garages in Garage G; for 6 in H, etc? Kicken said that's correct. They try to assign garages that are closest to their buildings. Schmidt asked who would get the garages in L and M, Building 10. Kicken said it's actually first come -first served so when they get to 98% occupied, they are limited in their selection. Chair Schmidt asked about access to the club house, she noticed there's a fence around the area. Can they access that from a number of different directions or do they need to come to the front of the club house? Kicken said they have an entry near the barbeque area, one by the heated dog walk station, and the main entrance. Member Stockover asked where the storage is located. Kicken said storage is on every balcony, is the length of the side of the balcony, and varies in depth between six and eight feet. Chair Schmidt asked to see the side shots of the building. She said it appears the balconies are in the recessed areas in the building. Chair Schmidt asked if there were any elevators. Kicken said no, they are all three story walk ups. Chair Schmidt asked if they are interior doors. Kicken said they are all interior doors except the ground level units will have two doors —a patio entry door and a breezeway entry door. Kicken said the ground level units have swing gates and sidewalks that go out to the public sidewalk. Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 16 space for the use of the residents that live nearby and who are willing to pay a premium for them. It provides an increased degree of privacy. Member Lingle shared his observation that a lot of the comments they received from the neighborhood have to do with the density and the building height. By implication then, the site design is driven by that program. Densities are 17.7. If the density is that high, it dictates the number of parking spaces or in this case the number of garage buildings. He said it then dictates the building height based on the footprint of the buildings themselves. In his opinion, that adversely affects the site design in terms of having so many internal buildings. He can imagine walking to the clubhouses through a sea of garages lined up one after the other. In some cases, you're crossing 4 or 5 garage buildings. He thinks that is not a good pedestrian experience for a resident. Sometimes the city has taken the position that we're only interested in the public realm along the streetscape but that's not his reading of the Land Use Code. It specifically talks to the character and the quality of the space within the development as well. That's where he's have some really "troubles". Campbell said he certainly understands his comments. The only way he can respond is to give his own observations from having designed and gone back to post -occupancy survey on a number of similar communities. He thinks that the experience for the neighbor going by garages is somewhat tempered by the quality of the space at the end of the walk. Certainly for a very short period you'd be walking by a number of garages. There are very appreciable open areas and above average landscaped areas as buffers along those edges. Campbell said in regard to the three story buildings, he's not aware of them exceeding any height cap for this property. He said as to the idea of the density, it can be considered as the transition from the commercial property. Multi family is often used as a buffer from the commercial to the single family residential. They see this as a pretty common strategy to be used in a situation such as this. Lingle said from his record on the board, he tends to advocate for more height in favor of more open space. In this case, he would advocate for a few taller buildings and more open space that would allow better pedestrian connections. Campbell apologized for misinterpreting his comment relative to height. Chair Schmidt said she has a similar concern. When reading page 13 of the staff report, it says the purpose of the standard is to discourage multi -family development from becoming an enclosed, inwardly - focused apartment complex surrounded by surface parking and garages. She thinks that was when the parking and garages were all on the outside. We've sort of flip-flopped. This still seems a rather inwardly focused scenario with all the parking now internal. Granted, for people driving along the street, they may have a better vision but there doesn't seem to be a lot of connection with the other access points. She asked, for example if she lived in Building A and wanted to ride her bicycle, there does not appear to be a way to easily get out to Lady Moon Drive. Campbell said they made a very strategic decision in relation to Lady Moon Drive to offer a heavily landscaped, bermed, and animated edge. One of the advantages they have is to be surrounded by public streets with detached nicely landscaped walks around the perimeter. He indicated the connectivity options. He said to the extent there are some isolated areas with regard to enhanced connectivity; they would be willing to work with staff to get to final submittal. His hope is that there are some incremental shifts that would address some of their concerns. He believes each one of the buildings has direct connectivity to the perimeter of the site and community amenities such as bike trails. Chair Schmidt asked what type of lighting is being planned around the garage areas. Campbell said what they typically do around the garage areas is coach light type of lighting (low intensity on a residential scale) mounted on the walls. He said it's more of a passage kind of function. He said they Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 15 Walker -Fish said she'd like to know how many bedrooms. Chair Schmidt said they are one and two bedroom apartments. Walter -Fisk said typically if you have two bedrooms in that age group you have a housemate so you have two cars per unit and you only have parking for one. The ratio of parking, while it might be very nice for apartment residents, in general is not great for the neighborhood. Staff member Shepard wanted to report a phone call from Maureen McCloud who is out of town. She lives at 3802 Morningside, Unit F and she opposes the project. Public Input Closed Board Questions: Chair Schmidt asked staff to address parking requirements. Shepard said that Cinquefoil has an old right-of-way cross section that is 65 feet and it allows parking on the street as does Rock Creek Drive. Shepard said there are 120 two bedroom units and 120 one bedroom units. The 2 bedrooms require 1.75 spaces for unit; the 1 bedroom units require 1.5 spaces for unit. That's a requirement for 390 parking spaces on site and this project provides 436 parking spaces. Chair Schmidt asked the applicant if they'd like to address the concern about why apartments versus condominiums. Kicken said he is an apartment developer —not a condominium developer. He believes their community is something that is necessary for local communities. When a community hasn't had new apartments for 10-15 years, Milestone builds to that niche. Kicken does not build and sell anymore. He enjoys going to the communities, meeting his residents, and knowing that he still owns the property. He does not want to build, sell, and move on. Kaplan said he'd like to address the apartment versus condominium question. He said when you look at the 247 acre overall development plan for the Harmony Technology Park, of the entire 247 acres there is the potential for 1,500,000 square feet of office development. There is only one apartment site. Of the 110 acres there are only 5 acres for secondary uses that allow for apartments. The reason why the 85 acres Presidio site has 36 acres of secondary use is that in the course of this ODP being done, there was an agreement with the previous owner (Hewlett Packard (HP)) that we would pay for their share of Rock Creek Drive if they were to transfer part of their secondary uses over to the 85 acres Presidio property and to the 37 acre (previously Brookfield Subdivision). The vision HP had for their property was for an office park; and that is the way it is preceding. The 85 acre Presidio property is a mixed -use project so the hotel site, membership club site, the 13 acres of retail, and the apartment were all contemplated in the course of doing the overall development plan. The only other potential residential site is Tract M and it is too small for an apartment project. He said the critical mass for apartments is 220 units —best suited on Tract J. Chair Schmidt asked if the garages are all one story. Kicken said yes. Member Lingle said he had some questions about the site design. He said he appreciates the gestures toward the four public streets as far as the placing the buildings along the perimeter, having garage ends face the streets, etc. However, the Land Use Code also expects a good internal design for the residents. He frankly has some concerns about how compact the site is in terms of garages and parking. When he looks at the site plan, there are 10 buildings and only one of them is not separated from the club house and community space by a garage/garages. Lingle asked how someone in Building 8 gets to the community building. Campbell indicated the sidewalks on the northerly and southerly side given their duty to provide access. Campbell said the feedback they get is counter intuitive to what Lingle suggested the zones that look like they might be cloistering actually tend to be desirable zones. Many times they become semi -private Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 14 property. In the detention pond are the landscaping offers a buffer for the residents on Morningside and Observatory Village to the south and provides an area for passive recreation. Campbell reviewed the elevations showing a masonry product at the base and cement fiber product above in two tones of color and organizing it in a horizontal banding. Buildings are compact —only 130 feet. Some other complexes have 150, 175 or 200 feet. The nice thing about that in a 3 story structure is it's just a 2:1 ratio (height to width) and that makes it a bit more homelike. It tapers up a bit with a "shed" roof. Campbell showed an image on Rock Creek looking west —a change made after two neighborhood meetings. As the trees grow (5-10 years), it gives you a feel for what that apartment community will look like when the trees are larger. Campbell presented an image that showed relative scale of a three story apartment building to the homes in the neighborhood on Morningstar and Observatory Village. The difference in height ridge to ridge is on the order of 12-16 feet. Campbell said the difference is due to single family homes with smaller structures but higher pitched roof against a building that has lower animation. Their roofs are modest and low pitch and that causes their heights to be not quite so great compared to other three story buildings the Board may have seen. Finally, at the suggestion of neighbors they change the architectural style to the one presented tonight. He showed illustrations of the club house, the strong front door image, and the combination of two- story and one-story. The garages are a cement fiber sided product. A number of garages are anchored with trash enclosures made of masonry and steel. He said Milestone is a rather knowledgeable apartment operator so they know from experience they want materials that last long so you're not seeing wood. Ken Kicken owns Milestone Development. He said Milestone has extensive experience —building over 5,000 apartment units located in the Denver area. Milestone is a very small, privately owned company in a joint venture with Les Kaplan. People attracted to their communities are normally 24-34 years of age. Statistics show that about 40% of their renters after 1.5 to 3 years of renting end up buying in the larger community. Kicken described the property's amenities. He said he tries to design for 50% open space and 100% garages. They have club houses that draw the residents out for weekly barbeques and holiday parties. They do that not only for the social aspect but to build a community within a community. As a closely held company, their communities are managed very tightly meaning that staff lives on the property. Residents do not have to call an 800 number. Maintenance is a high priority —buildings are painted between 3 and 4 years. Dead shrubs are replaced. The mix of units is 50% 1 bedroom and 50% two bedrooms/two baths. They have extra large functional balconies with storage available off that balcony. Kicken said landscaping is important to him. He said he's very big on evergreens because he believes they need to landscape 12 months a year. He said they are long term holders of the property —they have a lot of pride. He inspects his communities frequently. Besides staff contact information, all residents have Kicken's cell number so issues are resolved quickly. He's excited about coming to Fort Collins and filling a need in the community. They want to be the best neighbor they can be. Public Input: Natasha Walter -Fisk lives on Cinquefoil right across from the proposed complex. She's purchasing a 2nd story condominium that will now face a 2n story straight across the street and she's not too happy about that. She'd like to know why apartments —not condominiums. Also parking in Observatory Village is approached from the side streets. People park in their front yards because it's too far to go around to park. Since there's no entrance on Cinquefoil, there will be a lot of people in front of Building 2 and 3. It would probably be a good idea to put access to parking on Cinquefoil. Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 13 The Presidio property is just across Harmony from Hewlett Packard and is diagonally across the street from Front Range Village. These 85 acres are a part of a 274 acres Overall Development Plan (ODP) called the Harmony Tech Park ODP. This was originally approved in February 2000; it was amended in May 2004, September 2007, and January 2008. The amendments were primarily to increase the land area of the ODP as additional properties were added to the assemblage and to make minor adjustments between the primary and secondary uses. Kaplan said in every iteration of the ODP Tract J was indicated as a secondary use at 18 units per acre. Pursuant to a cost -sharing agreement amongst the various property owners of this ODP, there have been extensive on -site and off -site improvements that have occurred. This includes nearly all of the off - site improvements that will be necessary for the development of the Presidio property. Those improvements include Lady Moon Drive, the signal, a 46 inch storm sewer line along Rock Creek, an 18 inch sanitary sewer line that comes up Cinquefoil, and a 12 inch water line that goes down Rock Creek. Basically, all the off -site improvements are in. The Presidio Apartments is the first phase of the Presidio Development. In approaching this development, he put together a team of people who he felt would really do justice to the property as being the first phase of development. His partner in this development is Milestone Development. Milestone has extensive experience —building over 5,000 apartment units located in Denver. The architect is Kephart & Associates (national/international architects). The lead architect is a principal in the firm —Paul Campbell. Paul is on the Board of Trustees of the multi -family counsel of the National Association of Home Builders and considered to be a national expert on multi -family development. Northern Engineer has provided engineering services and Henry Design Group of Denver has done the landscape design. Paul Campbell provided information on the site plan and the proposed architecture. The site is 11.8 acres, 240 units. • The site has been organized around the four public streets in accordance with the City's guidelines for new urbanism as it relates to multi -family. • There are 10 residential buildings and they all front the streets. • There are a number of entries that also connect with the street. Front doors facing the street are all part of that new urbanism concept. • Parking has been internalized. • Their "front door' is to the north. • They have a secondary access off Rock Creek on the south side. • There is strong vehicular circulation through the site in an easy to comprehend pattern. It makes it very easy to separate pedestrians from vehicular access throughout the site. It's been a very heavily landscaped plan. • The landscaping that is occurring around the perimeter is part of that plan. Landscaping has occurred internal to the site as well on either side of the garages. • Milestone communities always do a 1:1 ratio on garages (rare in the apartment world). The garages have their "short end" towards the street. They never have a dimension more than 40 feet facing the street. The two garages that do have frontages over 40 feet have architectural detailing to account for that dimension. Campbell showed examples of enhanced landscaping that Henry Design has developed. The club house amenity has a very large amount of open space available for passive recreation. The swimming pool is in a strategic location on the site as far as being towards the center. Screening consists of pine trees and deciduous trees for variety. They've gone to great lengths to effectively screen that garage. The longest exposed garage is a bit of a backdrop to the detention area on the southeast corner of the Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 12 Regarding the two entrances to Building Eight, the proposed distances from the public sidewalk are found to be only slightly out of compliance with the standard of 200 feet especially considering the mid -block location. Staff evaluation is the site planning for these four buildings considered the competing objectives of providing entrances and walkways along the two public streets versus providing berms landscaping in clusters to promote neighborhood compatibility. While not necessarily mutually exclusive, Staff finds that the design solution meets the overall purpose of the Land Use Code for the following reasons: • The project benefits from the overall design of bringing all ten buildings up to the street and placing all parking internal to the site. There are no driveways or parking spaces located between the buildings and the streets. All surface parking is screened from public view. Such orientation is a fundamental aspect of City Plan. • All street -facing elevations are detailed and articulated. There are no blank or uninteresting walls facing the streets. • The internal network of walkways is generous. Walkways link all buildings to the central green, clubhouse and pool as well as out to all four streets. In total, there are 14 walkway connections to the four public sidewalks spread out over 13.5 acres. • At maturity, the berms and massing of the plant material along Lady Moon Drive will create an effective screen and present an attractive streetscape for the entire neighborhood. • Where buildings face residential, east and south, there are entrances and direct connecting walkways out to the street. This orientation will reinforce Rock Creek Drive as a neighborhood street. For buildings 7, 8, 9 and 10, however, these face primary uses in the Harmony Corridor district where there is less of a burden to contribute to the neighborhood development pattern. Staff finds that the purpose of the standard is to discourage multi -family development from becoming an enclosed, inwardly -focused apartment complex surrounded by surface parking and garages. Instead, the standard requires multi -family buildings to be integrated into the public street pattern by providing street -fronting buildings in the traditional manner of homes along neighborhood streets. Staff finds that Presidio Apartments accomplishes this vision and reinforces the system of streets and blocks. Staff, therefore finds that: • The granting of the Modification would not be detrimental to the public good. • The P.D.P., as proposed, will not diverge from the standards of the Land Use Code except in a nominal, inconsequential way when considered from the perspective of the entire development plan, and will continue to advance the purposes of the Land Use Code as contained in Section 1.2.2., the purpose statement of the Land Use Code. • This is because the P.D.P., as proposed, with all buildings oriented to the street, is fundamentally in compliance with the purpose and intent of the standard. And, all buildings remain connected to the perimeter streets with walkways. Finally, the P.D.P., with the proposed Modification, implements a key finding derived from the citizen input process to soften the appearance of the three-story buildings as much as possible by installing earthen berms and additional plant material. This solution effectively accomplishes this objective and would otherwise not be possible with land area needed to for six connecting walkways. Staff recommends approval of the Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(C) (1) (2) and approval of the Apartments at Presidio P.D.P. Les Kaplan represents the owner (Imago Enterprises, Inc.). The Presidio property is 85 acres. It consists of a ten property assemblage that began in 1999. Kaplan referred to the site map and surrounding land uses with schools for the area being Bacon, Kennard, Zach, Preston, and Fossil Ridge. Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 11 The site is 13.5 acres designated as Tract J of the 270-acre Harmony Technology O.D.P., Third Amendment which was approved in April of 2008. The O.D.P. indicates that this parcel is for secondary uses, multi -family, with an estimated 240 dwelling units with a density of 18 dwelling units per acre. Presidio Apartments P.D.P complies with the O.D.P. A Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(C)(1)(2) — Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking / Orientation to a Connecting Walkway — is proposed for Buildings 7, 8, 9 and 10. The standard at issue is Section 3.5.2(C) Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking. (1) Orientation to a Connecting Walkway. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face the adjacent street to the extent reasonably feasible. Every front facade with a primary entrance to a dwelling unit shall face a connecting walkway with no primary entrance more than two hundred (200) feet from a street sidewalk. (2) Street -Facing Facades. Every building containing four (4) or more dwelling units shall have at least one (1) building entry or doorway facing any adjacent street that is smaller than a full arterial or has on -street parking. Regarding Orientation to a Connecting Walkway, Building Eight, fronting on Lady Moon Drive, has two entrances that are greater than 200 feet from the public sidewalks. The north entrance is 240 feet from Precision Drive. The south entrance is 260 feet from Rock Creek Drive. Regarding Street -Facing Facades, Buildings 7, 8, 9 and 10 all have entrances that face the internal parking lot versus the adjacent public street. The applicant's justification is: Buildings 7, 8 and 9 face west onto Harmony Technology Park Third Filing which is zoned H-C and designated for primary uses. For example, this filing includes Custom Blending, a light manufacturing operation containing 35,000 square feet, with a potential expansion up to 50,000 square feet, on three acres. This type of facility is typical of the land uses that are expected on the remaining three lots located directly across Lady Moon Drive. Similarly, Building 10 faces north onto Harmony Technology Park O.D.P. Parcel I which is zoned H-C and designated for primary uses on 11.7 acres. The applicant contends that from an urban design perspective, the land area between the street and these four buildings would benefit from as much landscaping as possitle in order to mitigate the impacts of facing primary uses. Enhanced landscaping will contribute to the effectiveness of transitioning from Harmony Corridor primary uses on the north side of Rock Creek Drive to L-M-N uses on the south side of Rock Creek Drive. In addition, with regard to the west -facing Buildings 7, 8 and 9, attendees at the neighborhood meetings emphasized the desire to mitigate the size and height of the buildings with as much landscaping as possible. The applicant has responded by placing earthen berms and a generous amount of plant material between the public sidewalk and the buildings. Additional landscaping is gained instead of providing six connecting walkways allowing a variety of trees to be clustered for maximum screening. This landscaping is in addition to the street trees and exceeds the requirements of full -tree stocking. Planning & Zoning Board September 17, 2009 Page 10 And approval of zoning'qf the southerly 126 acres into there-O-L, Public Open Land Zone as well as placement of both zona districts into the Residential Neighborhood Sign District based on the findings of fact/conclusion listed (A-F) on page 6 of the revised staff report. A. The annexation of this parcel is consistent with the policies and agreements between Larimer County and the City of Fort Collins, as contained in the amended INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT — GROWTH MANAGEMENT AREA. B. The parcel meets all criteria included in State law to qualify for annexation by the City of Fort Collins. C. The requested zone dist 'cts/T, Transition, and P-O-L, Public Open Land, comply have been mutually decided up6,n the applicants and the City of Fort Collins. D. The Transition zone all s the owners and the City of Fort Collins to evaluate a variety of land development tions in order to make an informed decision on a future zone district(s). The P-O-L zone allows for reclamation of a former gravel pit to be converted to water storage and open space. E. Section 2.9.4(I) allows the City to add conditions of zoning. F. Staff recommends a condition of zoning to allow earth work activities that exceed the requirements of the State of Colorado for gravel pit reclamation, but subject to Project Development Plan. G. Staff rectct. mends both zone districts be placed within the Residential Neighborhood Sign Dis H. On August 18, 2009, City Council passed a Resolution which accepted the annexation petition and determined that the petition is in compliance with State law. First Reading of the Ordinances related to the annexation antf,rponing of the parcel are scheduled with City Council on October 6, 2009. Member Lingle seconded the motion. The motion passed 7:0. Project: Apartments at Presidio Project Development Plan, # 25-09 Project Description: This is a request for 240 multi -family dwellings units divided among ten three-story buildings, located on 13.6 acres. A 4,500 square foot two-story clubhouse with pool is also included along with eight mixed -use dwelling units. The site is located north of Rock Creek Drive, between Lady Moon Drive on the west and Cinquefoil Lane on the East. The site is zoned H-C, Harmony Corridor. A Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(C)(1)(2) — Relationship of Dwellings to Streets and Parking / Orientation to a Connecting Walkway — is proposed for Buildings 7, 8, 9 and 10. Recommendation: Approval of the Modification of Standard and the P.D.P. HearingTestimonV, Written Comments and Other Evidence Written Comments and Other Evidence Senior City Planner Ted Shepard said the Apartments at Presidio Project Development Plan, multi- family and mixed -use dwelling units are permitted within the Basic Industrial Non -Retail Employment Activity Center of the Harmony Corridor. The P.D.P. complies with the applicable standards of the H.C.P. and the H-C zone. Further, the P.D.P. complies with the applicable General Development Standards with one exception. A Modification of Standard to Section 3.5.2(C) (1) (2) is recommended to allow the two entrances on Building Eight building to be located greater than 200 feet from a public sidewalk and to allow Buildings 7, 8, 9 and 10 to have entrances that do not face the street as a design consideration resulting from neighborhood input.