HomeMy WebLinkAboutGLOBAL VILLAGE ACADEMY - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - SPA130007 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 10
Doug Talbot, with Highmark School Development (funding source of this project), asked what an
acceptable buffer would be between GVA and the neighborhood homes. He reminded the group that
there is already a fence in place and offered to make a wider area with landscaping continuing as phases
develop. He stated that he is interested in making this a win -win situation. Mr. Goode stated that he did
not believe a sidewalk would fit on the long sidewalk because of the queuing of busses for parking.
However, he said other sidewalks could be developed on other drives. Assistant City Attorney Vidergar
stated that, if the Board is satisfied with applicant's response, the Board can approve the plan on the
good faith follow-through of the applicant.
Member Schneider asked whether the Board should request a specific number for the buffering zone,
since he would like to see more buffering without moving entry point. City Planner Shepard suggested
that we explore the option of asking the applicant so they could respond and the Board could reach
satisfaction with their response. He went on to say that there is no specific metric for bufferyards, which
is done intentionally because they are generally qualitative, based on the unique aspects of the site. He
said that the southerly units of the patio homes are in the most need of buffering because of the taper.
He believes that 10 feet would be inadequate, while 20 feet would be perfect. Within the 20 feet, there
can be clustering of trees and any tapering would not make such an impact. Member Schneider asked
what the distance is on the southern row of trees. City Planner Shepard responded that the distance
between the southerly patio home and the access drive from Silver Trail is adequate (at 21 feet). Along
the north -south drive is the critical buffering area. Member Schneider asked if the applicant would be
willing to make the necessary adjustments. Mr. Talbot stated that 20 feet may be too much to
accomplish, but he believes that at least 10 feet is possible and he will try for more for the greatest
amount of buffering. Member Schneider asked if the applicant would be willing to look at adding
sidewalks. Mr. Talbot responded that he would be willing to add a sidewalk.
Member Kirkpatrick stated that she feels the more important sidewalk connection would be from Bronson
on the east side because it is internal to the site and would provide a safe access to the school. Mr.
Talbot suggested that, as the additional phases are developed, the sidewalk would continue down on
that side. Member Kirkpatrick reiterated that sidewalks should not be optional or partially built.
Assistant City Attorney Vidergar stated that it would be beneficial to reread the motion and then
determine whether the motion should be withdrawn or amended.
Member Hart stated that he doesn't think the motion should be amended, since the applicant is willing to
make some concessions and the Board's decision is simply to approve or disapprove. Chair Carpenter
asked if the Board needs to respond as to the acceptability of the applicant's response. Assistant City
Attorney Vidergar stated that the issue of satisfaction with the applicant's response is only applicable if
the Board disapproves the application.
Member Heinz asked whether consideration had been given to shifting the parking to the area currently
marked as "fields" to make more use of that space. Member Hart stated that the applicant is willing to
move the roadway at least 10 feet and put in a sidewalk at Silver Trail.
The motion was passed 4-3, with Chair Carpenter, Member Kirkpatrick, and Member Heinz
dissenting.
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 9
Member Hobbs stated that he also agrees. He believes GVA will be a great addition to the neighborhood
as long as they are coming in as a friend and not as an opponent. Creating a buffering zone and
handling logistics of pickups and drop-offs will set the stage for the neighbors.
Member Hansen stated that he also agrees with the other Board members. He reiterated that an
additional buffer would be the best option, in addition to moving the buildings so they are closer to Taft
Hill side rather than the intemal part of the neighborhood. He believes that the program is good and that
this is generally a good location.
Chair Carpenter stated that she also agrees that there is enough space on this site for additional
buffering. She believes that the program will be a good addition to the neighborhood, but she is still
concerned with the lack of mitigation between the roads and the walkability.
Mr. Gogerty stated that GVA's biggest constraint at present is money. Once buildings are at capacity,
they would review the possibility of shifting the road to add more buffering, although he is aware that a
four -lane Taft Hill Road could cut into the site.
Member Hart asked if there is additional right of way required on Taft Hill Road on that section. Tyler
Siegmund, from the Engineering Department, stated that there is additional right of way that is being
dedicated as part of this project. He said that, to meet our minimum four -lane street standard, an
additional 7'/2 feet is being dedicated. He said they did ask the applicant to look at the need for the
possibility of a right hand turn lane onto Horsetooth, which would result in an additional 12 feet to meet
the standard. This addition would encroach into the tree line.
Assistant City Attorney Vidergar clarified for the group that the Board's approval is based on the
application, which includes only Phase I at this time, and that any motion would automatically include
only Phase I.
Member Hart made a motion that the Planning & Zoning Board approve Global Village Academy
Site Plan Advisory Review SPA#130007 based on the findings of facts and conclusions. Member
Schneider seconded the motion. He went on to say that he would support this first phase of the
project but would like to see changes to the site plan before Phase 2 is proposed. Member Hart also
said he feels comfortable with Phase 1, considering the traffic flows will still be operating at acceptable
levels. Chair Carpenter stated that she is concerned that, if Phase I is approved, how will it be possible
to later move the roadway to accommodate the neighborhood? Member Kirkpatrick also stated that, if
we approve this Phase I, we are indicating that this project meets our standards with regard to character,
extent, and location without any of the improvements the Board has suggested. Member Hart offered to
amend his motion. Assistant City Attorney Vidergar clarified that the decision that the Board can make
can only be an approval or disapproval without conditions. Member Kirkpatrick stated that she does not
support this project with respect to the criteria of character, extent, and location. Member Schneider
restated that, if the project is disapproved, it could go to the BoE, and this was confirmed again by
Assistant City Attorney Vidergar.
Member Hart stated that, because this site is zoned L-M-N, having a school there is a very good fit, since
other types of buildings could generate a lot more traffic operating at longer hours than a school would.
Member Hobbs asked whether, if the Board disapproves, the applicant has the opportunity to return with
an amended site plan to this Board. Assistant City Attorney Vidergar responded that the appropriate
process would be for the applicant to request the decision to be tabled tonight until they can bring back a
revised site plan for consideration rather than resubmitting.
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 8
other changes to accommodate the traffic and city's requests for modifying the site. There has been
three or four modification to date, including landscaping and building placement.
Member Schneider asked whether the color selections portrayed in the diagrams were the final colors or
if they would be toned down. Ms. Wilson stated that the colors would be toned down, especially the
yellow color. She said the intent wasn't to have bright colors but to have a more natural color scheme.
Member Hart asked how much time would be offset specifically before and after school hours. Mr.
Gogerty stated that the offsetting times would occur before and after school hours. The GVA school day
is longer than the Olander school day, so they are prepared to offset the time up to 20 minutes before
and after school. He also stated that 15 minutes is usually adequate for students to load and unload on
the site.
Member Schneider asked whether there is enough space between the internal drive and the GVA
property line to accommodate future trees and landscaping buffers. Ms. Wilson responded that it would
be minimal, and the trees would not be tall. Member Schneider asked if the drive off of Silver Trails was
moved to the south to accommodate larger trees. Ms. Wilson responded that this is the case. Member
Schneider asked if they would be willing to create a buffer between at Bronson and the GVA property.
Ms. Wilson responded that the alignment is with the street on the other side of Bronson to the north, so
they worked again with the city on just the location.
Member Kirkpatrick asked if the board could discuss some ideas to let the applicant address issues
immediately. Assistant City Attorney Vidergar confirmed that this would be appropriate. He stated that,
under the statutory process, the Board can make comments on the application and the applicant can
respond one final time before a decision is made by the Board.
Board Discussion
Member Kirkpatrick stated that she supports the school itself but questions the site placement. While
she is confident that traffic and flow concerns will be addressed, she isn't satisfied with the character of
the development and how it relates to the character of the neighborhood, including the lack of buffering
to the single-family homes and lack of pedestrian connectivity. She suggested that a longer circulation
drive would be appropriate in order to have more landscape buffering. She would also like to include
sidewalks internal to the site at all locations as a baseline standard in development and not added only
when budget permits.
Member Hart agreed with this assessment and said that, especially since this is only Phase 1. He
believes that we should take a hard look at Phase 2, when appropriate, and consider shifting the
buildings to provide more space between the school and the neighbors located to the west. As a good
neighbor, GVA should consider the neighborhood concerns and strive for the best livability possible.
Member Schneider stated that he would like to see more separation between the internal drive plus more
connectivity, looking at this project from a multi -mobile standpoint and walkability. There is a need to
connect the neighborhood to the school, and he would like to see the entrance point on Bronson shifted
to create more of a buffer.
Member Heinz stated that there needs to be more buffering between the school and neighbors for streets
and buildings. She also stated that she feels this is a great program and she would like to see them in
Ft. Collins.
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 7
Member Heinz asked what other circulation options were available. Mr. Stanford responded that other
options are available, but they have other congestion and safety concerns. The applicant has also
looked at other options, but this option is one of the better.
Member Schneider asked about the proximity of the internal drive and whether this plan is in compliance
with any setback distance minimums. Mr. Stanford responded that, regarding setbacks, there are only a
couple of feet in alleys, and this may be more of a planning characteristic. From an engineering
standpoint, Mr. Stanford did not recall that this was an issue. City Planner Shepard also stated that there
are no metrics in the code for this type of setbacks.
Member Hobbs asked about how the city and county work together in a joint improvement project when
both city and county roads are at risk. Mr. Stanford responded that there are mutual standards that all
municipalities have developed which cover city and county. If a residential area came in for
redevelopment, another traffic study would be performed to determine whether service levels are
unacceptable. Member Hobbs also asked whether a potential widening at the intersection in question
would enable a better traffic flow. Mr. Stanford responded that the flow is currently good, as those
roadways can handle a high volume of traffic. He went on to say that, in time, there is an expectation
that Taft Hill Road will have to be widened.
Member Kirkpatrick asked if there were any standards related to air quality and cars queuing. City
Planner Shepard responded that, while this issue has come up before, from a community -wide air quality
perspective, city policies don't focus on "hot spots". Rather, the city focuses on regional air quality
standards.
Member Hansen asked, regarding the driveways adjacent to the back of the lots on the patio homes,
what kind of setbacks do those homes have off of the street. City Planner Shepard responded that the
minimum required setback is 15 feet, the minimum required setback for a driveway is 20 feet. He went
on to say that the setbacks will taper to align with the streets and backyards, sometimes reaching up to a
50-60 foot setback.
Member Hart asked whether there had been other project proposals denied due to traffic. City Planner
Shepard responded that there had been no other projects denied. He stated there have been
conceptual reviews and interested applicants making inquiries, but nothing was ever formally submitted.
Some of the past ideas included residential, multi -family, and convenience centers. Because it is zoned
L-M-N, there is also the non-residential aspect of L-M-N, called the neighborhood center.
Chair Carpenter asked whether the drawing submitted by a citizen, now called Exhibit 1, was considered
to be an older version of the area. City Planner confirmed that the site plan had been revised since the
neighborhood meeting on November 9, 2014, so this exhibit is an older version.
Member Kirkpatrick stated that, looking at the landscape plan submitted, there does not appear to be
inclusion of sidewalks on the private drives throughout the site. Jason Goode, of Faurot Construction,
stated that there are sidewalks at the queuing area, but not along the walkways. This aspect had not
been discussed because of the limited budget based on the number of students. Member Kirkpatrick
asked whether the internal road that starts at Bronson and heads south into the site should be shifted to
provide room to have a landscape buffer behind the homes. Mr. Goode responded by saying that a
landscape buffer will be added as the site is developed; currently street trees and a landscape buffer
along Taft Hill Road and Horsetooth Road are being added. Member Kirkpatrick also asked what
elements were changed in the site design in response to the desire to be a good neighbor. Ms. Wilson
responded that the landscape buffer is one element, along with the development of an adequate traffic
flow and queuing system. Mr. Gogerty stated that the site has been shifted to the north in addition to
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 6
between access points or driveways. The goal is to avoid having additional vehicles mixing into the
traffic stream, resulting in higher congestion levels and lanes being too close to an intersection.
Mr. Stanford agreed that Olander Elementary has done a good job with its own circulation. He did not
witness that anyone was experiencing any difficulty exiting Bronson onto Taft Hill Road at approximately
9am, even with snow on the ground. One concern is the intersection which is not controlled by lights or
stop signs but is an onsite control situation. He has worked out a flow whereby vehicles coming east -
west and north -south don't have to cross each other. The vehicles coming in from Silver Trails going
east into the site could simply make a right turn to circulate around the parking lot. The vehicles coming
in from Bronson would be southbound and they would go through that intersection, so there would be a
merging of right turners and through turners, not a crossing of these. He added that the safety of the
children at that intersection is a high priority. He addressed the statement regarding Blevins, which is
located on Taft Hill Road and has a wide crossing. He stated that it is likely that a HAWK Beacon, one of
the newer pedestrian crossing signals which include a dual red flashing light, will be installed. It is
actually designed for pedestrian movement. Finally, Mr. Stanford addressed the concern of exiting
Bronson. He stated that this situation did not appear to have a high difficulty, although he conceded that
it might be worse during morning rush hour. He wanted to determine whether a right turn lane is
warranted southbound on Taft Hill Road. The outside lane is currently serving as a right turn lane on Taft
Hill Road. He also wanted to determine whether enough of the traffic is actually moving over into the
through lane allowing that right turn lane to be north of Bronson. In this observation, typically about 90%
of traffic has already moved to that through lane leaving the right-hand lane to serve as a right turn lane.
Mr. Stanford acknowledged that there are accidents on Taft Hill Road, but at the level of expectation for
that area.
City Planner Shepard added that the applicant is willing to offset their future school schedule with
Olander Elementary up to 20 minutes on either end of the school day in order to create gaps in traffic
flow. In addition, any future expansion (Phase 2) would require another Transportation Impact Study as
well as another Site Plan Advisory Review with this Board.
Board Questions
Member Hart stated, for clarification, that the decision currently at hand is only based on Phase 1. City
Planner Shepard confirmed that that is true.
Member Kirkpatrick asked whether there was any consideration to changing the signalization at Taft Hill
Road or Horsetooth in order to make any of the lights longer. Mr. Stanford responded that adjustments
will be made as needed. Member Kirkpatrick also asked if a right hand turn from Bronson onto Taft has
been considered. Mr. Stanford stated that it had not been considered because it would have to be a
result of an issue that showed the characteristic of a high level of delay. Member Kirkpatrick restated
that, if a high level of delay was proven due to a large enrollment increase, then reconsideration of the
traffic lights would be warranted. Mr. Stanford responded that it would be a possibility using a baseline
now and then performing new observations. Such impact would have to be clearly documented in order
to evaluate available funds and priority. Member Kirkpatrick reiterated that several neighbors appear to
be very concerned about that area.
Member Hart asked about how the density development of the site for both Phase 1 and 2 compares to
Poudre School District. City Planner Shepard responded by saying that the larger elementary schools in
the southern part of the city are on larger sites; comparably -sized schools north of Drake are on slightly
smaller sites. Depending on when the school campus was developed, the typical K-6 schools offer a
wide range of subjects that charter schools do not offer. Comparing this campus to other schools, it is
somewhat smaller than schools on south side of the city but compares favorably to northern schools.
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 5
Case Ferguson, 2506 Fox Run Court, is in favor of the project. He lives a mile away from the proposed
site and has three children currently attending GVA. He puts a high value on children being bilingual.
He would also plan for his children to walk or ride bikes to school to help traffic issues. He has no desire
to see traffic jams, but he knows this site will eventually be developed. He approves of the proposed
architecture of the school and believes it will be very valuable to the community.
Kristina Balikokum, 2218 Bronson Street, is opposed to the project. She feels that, while the concept of
the school is wonderful, the traffic is already bad at the Bronson intersection. She does not believe it is a
good plan architecturally and in view of potential accidents. She would like the traffic patterns to be
reevaluated.
Tanja Hess, 2300 Hampshire Square, is in favor of the project. Her son attended Olander Elementary
but now has been moved to GVA. She is from Brazil and wanted to share how well language education
can benefit children.
End of Public Input
Staff Response
Chair Carpenter asked Secretary Cosmas if any other information had been received regarding this
project since the Board met at the work session on January 3, 2014. Secretary Cosmas responded by
reading the names of the neighbors who had submitted letters via email, including:
• Paul and Janice Rozman — building placement concerns
• Doris Pellemeier — parking concerns
• Janet Else - building placement concerns
• Georgia Fulks — traffic and neighborhood concerns
Chair Carpenter asked Attorney Vidergar to explain again the responsibility and purview of the Planning
and Zoning Board in their deliberation of this topic. He responded by saying that the scope of their
review is to look at this application as submitted with regard to the location, character, and extent of the
improvements that have been proposed. Based on that review, P&Z Board can approve or disapprove
the plan; if the plan is disapproved, the applicant can go to the Board of Education (BoE) and request a
review of this decision. The BoE will decide whether to overturn the decision of the P&Z Board. In
addition, the P&Z Board has the opportunity to decide whether they are satisfied with the applicant's
response to the concerns of the Board. The P&Z Board can also request a hearing before the governing
body of the charter school applicant; this is not a requirement but can be a separate request.
Mr. Delich began by reiterating that the level of service requirement prescribed by the City has been met
for this project. He also stated that any other proposed expansions would require another traffic impact
study.
Ward Stanford, with the Traffic Operations Department, explained that the level of service is a qualitative
look at the traffic flow of an area and is determined by how much delay a motorist might experience over
a period of time. There are levels of service standards that are assigned based on the zoning
characteristics of a roadway for comparison purposes. He addressed the concern of an "inadequate
queue", and he agreed that there is a substantial amount of queue even compared to high schools or
charter schools. He was not able to address the signage issues, since the city controls signs on public
roadways. Regarding the accesses from Taft Hill Road, there is a minimum separation of 460 foot
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 4
Dr. Rob Allerheiligen, 3701 Carrington Road, is in favor of this project. He is on the Board of Directors of
GVA. He is very enthusiastic about the academy's curriculum and focus. He also stated that the Board
of GVA takes the neighborhood concerns very seriously, and solutions are being developed for each. He
believes this is a positive option for this area and could actually increase property values. He stated that
GVA is interested in being a "good neighbor".
Faye Martin, 140 North Sherwood Street, is in favor of this project. She placed her second grader there
with great overall success. She also stated that GVA is excellent at communicating with parents, and
they require parents to be more involved than a public school would (a school enrollment requirement).
Dr. Hussam Mahmoud, 1414 Westfield Drive, is in favor of this project. Based on his personal
experience moving here from Egypt, he feels that, if such a school had been available to him, he would
have had more opportunities to be better prepared in life. He believes that leaders have a certain
obligation to give kids the tools they need to be prepared for "competition". He stated that students that
can fit into an exchange program will also be more competitive in the future. Lastly, he feels this school
would present more of a draw to people coming to Ft. Collins.
Dr. Juan Rodriguez, 2621 Kit Fox Court, is in favor of this project. He is from Peru and his parents
immigrated here. He believes in the language immersion program, as that was his own experience. He
also stated that knowing several languages has been extremely helpful in his career. He also lives close
to the neighborhood in question, and he knows this property will be developed eventually. He feels this
plan is a good option for the neighborhood.
Dave Colliton, 2267 Silver Oaks Drive, is opposed to this project. He stated that he has been involved in
developing and designing facilities for many years. He believes this is a bad location for this school.
While the traffic flow in and out of Olander Elementary is well-done, he believes there isn't enough space
to create a similarly good traffic flow for GVA. He also discussed the sidewalk placement and setbacks;
snow plowing will only make it worse. He feels this project should be disapproved.
Kathandra Luongo, 2314 Silver Oaks Drive, is opposed to this project. She previously sent a letter to the
Coloradoan giving community input as to why she believes this is a bad site for reasons of traffic. She
cited traffic problems at Blevins as an example of other schools with problems on Taft Hill Road. She
said that a previous project trying to install a gas station at this site was turned down before due to traffic
problems.
Barbara Schwerin, 1448 Bison Run Drive in Windsor, is in favor of this project. She is on the Board of
Directors for GVA, as well as on many other boards. She was involved with other alternative schools in
Ft. Collins and knows that the "core knowledge' curriculum has been adopted by many schools. She
stated that language immersion schools have been proven effective. She understands that there is also
an increased demand for homes in those neighborhoods with such schools.
Ray Martinez, 4121 Stoneridge Court, is a former mayor of Ft. Collins and is currently the President for
the Board of GVA. He stated that it is the Board's intent to make accommodations for coordinating
school times, traffic congestion, and any other areas necessary. His message to residents is that GVA is
concerned about safety, noise, traffic and other concerns. He stated that GVA wants to be a good
neighbor and teach the children to live in harmony.
Nathalie Riggs, 3725 Rockaway Street, is in favor of this project. She is from France and gave the group
some perspective of people from other cultures and how people with European backgrounds tend to walk
more than Americans (therefore, future traffic concerns may be mitigated somewhat with this clientele).
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 3
parking plans. She also reviewed the school floor plans (primarily classrooms, cafeteria, and
administrative spaces), exterior materials (metal panels), and elevations.
Joseph Delich, of Delich & Associates, who prepared the Traffic Impact Study, stated that all key
intersections meet the City's prescribed level of service standards, including bike traffic and transit. He
stated that the queue length at school dismissal time is projected to be 51 vehicles. GVA will encourage
parents to travel down Bronson Street during this time of day. He also stated that, based on current bus
ridership and carpooling, he expected a much shorter queue than what has been calculated.
Board questions:
Member Hart asked whether bus transportation would also be expanded in the future if the school
enrollment expands. Mr. Delich responded by saying that bus transportation would be expanded based
on demand. Member Hart asked what the ultimate build -out on this site would be. Mr. Delich replied that
the ultimate build -out is 700 students if the additional classrooms are also included.
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence
Public Input
Warren Moore, 2210 Silver Trails Drive, began by introducing his traffic handout (Exhibit 1). He stated he
is opposed to any development that would produce so much traffic. Because there are only two ways
into the neighborhood, he doesn't believe there is enough room for cars (approximately 70-80 extra
cars). He believes that the distances are too short to fit the traffic into. He suggested that a driveway be
built near the south end and assigned as a right turn only lane, which he believes would be a win/win for
everyone. He is not opposed to the school itself but would like to see the traffic flow reconfigured.
At this time Chair Carpenter requested that Assistant City Attorney Vidergar review exactly what the
Board can deliberate on tonight in order to clarify that for everyone. Attorney Vidergar stated that there
are two statutory provisions that cover this review. One provision requires a review based on location,
character, and extent relative to the community. The second provision involves a review by the P&Z
Board of the development plan within 30 days of submission. The statutory provision allows the local
P&Z Board to approve or disapprove the application, but they cannot deny the application. If the
decision today is disapproval, this decision cannot be appealed to the City Council.
Michelle Lowe, 1429 Tori Court in Loveland, CO, is in favor of this project. She spoke of the benefits of
the immersion program for the overall development of children. She approves of this school project, as it
is nationally recognized and extremely successful overall.
Paul Tomlinson, 2219 Bronson Street, opposes this plan. He wants to be sure this process would
preserve the character of the neighborhood and the property values. His concerns are with the traffic
and the fact that there will be so much development on such a small space. He questioned how it will
impact the enrollment and funding of Olander Elementary. He also questioned whether this is the best
site for this school. He expressed confidence in the Board's final decision.
Janice Rozman, 3532 Silver Trails Drive, is opposed to this project. She lives in the patio homes in the
neighborhood and believes that the road to be installed will be too close to some of the homes. She is
concerned that the privacy and resale values will decrease. She is also concerned with the traffic. She
would like to see the GVA building placed further north.
Planning & Zoning Board
January 9, 2014
Page 2
Consent Agenda:
1. Minutes from November 21 and December 12, 2013
2. Scott Plaza PDP#130032
3. 2013 P&Z Annual Report
4. CargillODP#130005
5. Narcanon Fence PDP/FDP #120023
Member Hansen recused himself at 6:05 pm due to a personal conflict of interest with several items on
the Consent agenda.
Member Hart made a motion to approve the January 9, 2014, Consent agenda as stated, including
minutes from the November 21 and December 12, 2013, hearings, Scott Plaza PDP#130032, 2013
P&Z Annual Report, Cargill ODP#130005, and Narcanon Fence PDP/FDP #120023. Member
Schneider seconded. The motion passed 6:0.
Member Hansen rejoined the group at 6:09 pm.
Discussion Agenda:
6. Item was removed for further staff review.
7. Global Village Academy SPAR #13007
8. Aggie Village North SPAR #130005
Project: Global Village Academy SPAR #13007
Project Description: This is a request to develop the vacant ground located at the northwest corner of
West Horsetooth Road and South Taft Hill Road for a public charter school that would serve an
estimated 500 students ranging from pre-school through eighth grade. The building would be
approximately 24.000 square feet in size and two stories in height and include 47 parking spaces. Also,
future additions of 8,200 square feet and 24,100 square feet are proposed in case of an increase in
enrollment or to serve high school age students. The site is 5.02 acres and is zoned L-M-N, Low Density
Mixed -Use Neighborhood.
Recommendation: Approval
Planner Shepard gave an overview of the project. Terry Gogerty, Chief Development Officer of Global
Network Academies, gave a presentation of the Global Village Academy (GVA) project. He reviewed the
current site selection and the reasons for selecting Ft. Collins. GVA programs will be a unique, proven
program, especially for English language learners. He reviewed the operation factors. including bus
usage. He stated that GVA is willing to offset their school schedule to accommodate Olander
Elementary School to reduce traffic issues. Their expansion will only occur to meet increased enrollment
demand for this K-8 school; GVA does not currently plan to have a high school on the site. At most, GVA
would eventually add some administrative offices and a gym. He stated that the success of GVA's
program is due to language immersion, which begins in Kindergarten at 100% immersion and then
decreases each year after that.
Adele Wilson, with Slater Paul Architects, spoke as a representative of the Design Team. She discussed
the access points to the new school, located off of Bronson and Silver Trails Drive. future expansion and
Chair Carpenter called the meeting to order at 6:OOp.m.
Roll Call: Carpenter, Hansen, Hart, Heinz. Hobbs, Kirkpatrick. and Schneider
Absent: None
Staff Present: Kadrich, Vidergar, Ex. Shepard, Lorson, Gloss, Beals. Burnett, and
Cosmas
Agenda Review
Member Carpenter provided background on the board's role and what the audience could expect as to
the order of business. She described the following processes:
• 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 compliance or non-compliance with city Land
Use Code.
• Should a citizen wish to address the Board on items other than what is on the agenda, time will
be allowed for that as well.
• 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.
Director Laurie Kadrich reviewed the items on both the Consent and Discussion agendas. She clarified
that item #6 had been removed from the agenda (Historic Preservation code changes) in order for staff to
further review and make future recommendations.
Election of Officers: Member Hart nominated Member Carpenter to be the Chair of the Planning &
Zoning Commission for 2014-15. Member Kirkpatrick seconded the motion. Vote: 7:0 in favor.
Member Heinz nominated Member Kirkpatrick to be the Vice Chair of the Planning & Zoning Commission
for 2014-15. Member Hobbs seconded. Vote: 7:0 in favor.
Public Input: None.