Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOLUMBINE EAST LONG TERM CARE - PDP - 11-05 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes June 16, 2005 Page 6 Member Schmidt seconded the motion The motion was approved 6-0. Project: Greeley Waterline Enhancement Transmission Project — Site Plan Advisory Review, /tovide Proj ct Description: Request to construct the Fort Collins 60-inch diameter water transmission ladditional water transmission capacitBellvue Water Treatment Plant to theGreeley's treated water distribution s Recommendation's, Approval Member Torgerson conflicteA out on this item. Anne Aspen, City Planner gave a Staff Presenta ' n recommending approval. This is a proposal fora 60-inch diameter p' eline that i ntirely underground and will run from the Bellvue Water Treatment to Gree s wa r treatment distribution system. About nine miles of that is within the city of Fo lins. Staff has been asked to do a site plan advisory review. Staff has not found an tal flaws in terms of location, character and extent and staff is recommending ap val. Tom Boyle, Boyle Engineering s ted that the maRbeing shown is the overall project map from the viewpoint of the ity of Greeley. It is tually a 30 mile pipeline that will run from their treatment pl north of Bellvue all the y down in through the city of Greeley. At this point th have constructed about two d a half miles in Windsor and they are currently un construction for about seven mile between Windsor and Timnath. The piec in Fort Collins is what they are studying ow and is what is before the Board right w. Mr. Boyle showed a schematic drawing that showed the process th=ty through ' order to find the preferred route they are at today. Mr. oyle reported that last night they had their public hearing with and reived approval of the location and extent on the project. They also have t it Gveband delineation agreement with the Corp of Engineers. From that they inten to Planning and Zoning Board Minutes June 16, 2005 Page 5 Mr. Gauspohl replied that they have done a couple of things on the east side of the property line. The first is that they have landscape buffer there and there are a number of trees. The second is that there is currently a fence there and it is in pretty rough condition and it is a wood fence. They will be replacing it with a solid masonry fence, that was one of the requests from the neighbors and light and noise will not be able to get through that fence because it will be solid masonry. Member Craig asked why they did not put in any evergreen trees because that would also give a visual buffer also year round. Mr. Gauspohl replied that was likely a function to their proximity to the fence. With a deciduous tree you get a canopy above the fence and there was not the space to put evergreens. Member Craig asked if there would be a problem with it branching out onto their properties. Mr. Gauspohl replied that was what the neighbors would like for it to branch out over the fence. Chairperson Meyer asked Planner Olt to speak to the traffic on the Oakridge project. Planner Olt responded that he would ask Matt Delich who is the traffic engineer for the project to address the question. Matt Delich, 2272 Glen Haven Drive, Loveland stated that he did both traffic studies for the Oakridge Senior Community as well as the Columbine East facility. He stated that the trip generation from both these types of facilities is very low compared to other uses that can go into this area. For example in the Oakridge area, it is in an area that was formerly going to be a business park. The traffic from that particular use would be tremendously higher than what the senior community would generate. As far as the speed on the streets, that is more of an enforcement issue. The traffic from this use, the Oakridge senior community is not likely that they would drive any faster than anyone else on those streets or the people who live on those streets. Mr. Delich reported that for both of the projects all the key intersections that were analyzed acceptably met all the criteria for the city of Fort Collins. Member Carpenter moved for approval of the Columbine East Long Term Care Facility, PDP, #11-05 based on the findings of fact and conclusions in the staff report. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes June 16, 2005 Page 4 not speak to the Oakridge project. The traffic impacts can be accommodated by the existing facilities at the intersections. Chairperson Meyer asked the applicant to speak about the ambulances. Yvonne Meyers, Columbine Health Systems replied that obviously they are going to call the ambulance. It is a nursing home and more of the residents of a nursing home are at the end stages of their lives. They have given up full code status and calling for paramedics to save their lives. They do more hospice care. They don't call as many ambulances for nursing homes as they do assisted living. The properties around them that were referred to are assisted living and those folks are more able to get around and about and still want to resuscitated and taken to the hospital. What they have found is that the ambulances as they get closer and know it is a nursing home they are not coming with all the lights as if she would call for an ambulance and as they get closer they turn them off. Chairperson Meyer asked Ms. Meyers to differentiate between assisted living and a nursing home. Ms. Meyers replied that people that live in assisted living, the requirement by the Health Department for licensure is that you cannot be required to be lifted, you can still move yourself about and you are still able to manage activities of daily living. People in nursing homes need 24 hour skilled nursing care by a nurse. Member Schmidt commented that her parents live at the Worthington and her grandmother was in the assisted living facility, so they have been there for quite awhile. The ambulance issue has not been a problem there and she even asked them when she was there for lunch today if they have problems with ambulances. They told her that they hear the police cars on Shields all the time and the train and trash trucks in the morning, but no problem with ambulances. She felt that there would not be an increase in ambulance noise. When staff previously discussed the Oakridge project at worksession, there was not really an issue with the density because it is allowable under the Code and also the Board felt the setbacks from the ditch were within the correct allowable rules for this development. That is why the Board felt they could put it on the consent agenda because they had tried to buffer from the neighborhood. The nursing care facility will have a lot less impacts on the neighborhood than the assisted living facility. Member Craig asked the applicant to address the east side where they would be impacting a couple of properties as far as what they did to mitigate the parking lot and the fact that they are so close to their houses. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes June 16, 2005 Page 3 the traffic moves on Harmony Road more so than on Lemay. What we are talking about here is some interesting ideas that probably can and should be integrated into the neighborhood and he liked that concept. He wondered how much additional traffic these developments would bring to an already extremely congested and dangerous area. He and his neighbors are concerned. There is a cut off that goes between Lemay and Harmony on the south side of Harmony. The speed limit is 25 mph and the average speed on that road which is a combination of Keenland and McMurry, according to a recent study done by the Police Department is well in excess of that speed limit. At least 15% of the traffic in that thoroughfare is exceeding 38 mph. Maureen Pachini 1437 Last Oak Ct. spoke to the Board and stated that she also there to discuss Item 6 because her house backs to that development proposal. She stated that the Rule Drive property they walk by also all the time. She had sent a letter into the Planning Board expressing their concern with the density that is going in in those areas and the ambulances. They already have so many nursing home type facilities in Oakridge and around that area and if you live in that area, you see and hear ambulances all the time. The addition of two more facilities is of concern to those who live in that area. Another concern is that it is a family neighborhood and if you put elderly people in an area like that they might not like the family environment, they are probably trying to get away from it and live in a senior area. Ms. Pachini was also concerned with the traffic on the streets and bike trails and if you add elderly to that scenario it could be very dangerous for them. She was not sure because number 6 was not even addressed how much of the concerns of some of the neighbors have been addressed especially the density issue. She asked if number six was even on the agenda. Chairperson Meyer responded that it was twice asked if there was any input on number six from anyone in Oakridge and no one came forward so it was moved to the consent agenda. PUBLIC INPUT CLOSED Chairperson Meyer asked Planner Shepard to respond to traffic and density. Planner Shepard replied that technically speaking on the traffic we could defer to the applicant's traffic engineer to get the numbers and the data. Our indication at the staff review level is that the clients of the nursing home don't generate traffic and that the traffic generated is from the employees. The employees are divided among three shifts. The operational aspects of Lemay and Rule do not require a traffic signal as a result of this project. The stop sign at Rule and Wheaton will remain a stop condition for Rule. Everything seems to operate acceptably as a result of this particular project. He could Planning and Zoning Board Minutes June 16, 2005 Page 2 Member Schmidt moved to approve consent agenda items 1, 2, and 6. Member Craig seconded the motion. Member Torgerson commented on the Sunstone M' - se Item and he noticed that there is a requirement in the Land Use C a utilities and mechanical units be screened from public view. Thi icular Center does not even come close to complying. However, t m before the Board is separate from that. There are very large air condi ' g units along Timberline Road that are terribly unsightly. motion was approved 6-0. Project: Columbine East Long Term Care Facility, Project Development Plan, #11-05 Project Description: Request for a 131-bed long term care facility (nursing home) to be located on the site of the Rule Farm at 4824 South Lemay Avenue. The new building would be two -stories in height and contain 88,000 s.f. The existing house, barn and other out buildings would be removed. The property is zoned HC, Harmony Corridor. Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Ted Shepard gave the staff presentation recommending approval. Mark Gauspohl, from Vaught -Frye Architects gave the applicant presentation. He gave a background of the project being on the Rule Farm. He informed the board about access from Rule Drive and Lemay Avenue and the only traffic would be visitors and staff during the day and staff at night and that entrance would be off of Lemay Avenue. The small amount of traffic would be during the daylight hours. He spoke of the design of the building and things that have been done to reduce the scale of the building, elevations, color, and screening of the mechanical units, landscaping, and location of courtyards, pedestrian access and circulation. They feel that they building will be an asset to the neighborhood and the neighbors will be very happy with it. PUBLIC INPUT Bill Milliken,1500 Redberry Court in Oakridge stated that he was hoping to come and hear something about Item 6 on the agenda, but this item is in similar and in the same area. Mr. Milliken asked if anyone is looking at the traffic situation. The speed in which Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat Chairperson: Judy Meyer Vice Chair: Dave Lingle Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss Phone: (W) 490-2172 Phone: (W) 223-1820 Chairperson Meyer called the meeting to order at 6:50 p.m. Roll Call: Carpenter, Stockover, Torgerson, Craig, Schmidt, Meyer. Member Lingle was absent. Staff Present: Wray, Eckman, Shepard, Olt, Aspen, Wray, Herzig, Harridan, Wamhoff and Deines. Citizen Participation: None. Director of Current Planning Pete Wray reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: Consent Agenda: 1. Resolution PZ05-06 — Easement Vacation. 2. Resolution PZ05-07 — Easement Vacation. 3. Resolution PZ05-08 — Easement Dedication. 4. #25-05 Sunstone Mixed -Use Center, Addition of a Restaurant Use (Mugs Coffee Shop) — Major Amendment. 5. #22-05 Habitat Palm Drive — Project Development Plan Discussion Agenda: 6. # 13-82CW Oakridge Business Park, 38th Filing (Oakridge Senior Campus) - Project Development Plan. 7. #11-05 Columbine East Long -Term Care Facility — Project Development Plan. 8. #21-05 Greeley Waterline Enhancement Transmission Project (G-Wet) — Site Plan Advisory Review. Member Craig moved to move Item 6, Oakridge Business Park, 38th Filing (Oakridge Senior Campus) to the Consent Agenda. Member Torgerson seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0.