Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1225 REDWOOD STREET - REZONE & STRUCTURE PLAN AMENDMENT - 30-02 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 9 Member Torgerson moved to recommend to City Council approval of the change of zoning from I, Industrial to CCN, Community Commercial North College for case #30-02. Member Bernth seconded the motion. The motion was approved 4-2 with Members Craig and Gavaldon voting in the negative. Project: Taft Hill/Hull Rezoning and Structure Plan Amendment, #31-02 Project Description: Request to amend the City Structure f�%n and rezone three parcels of land at the northeast corner of the intersection of Taft Hill Road and Hull Street, south of Drake Road. The existing designation is LMN, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood, the proposed designation is MMN, Medium Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. The three parcels total 15.3 acres. Recommendation: Denial Hearing Testimony, Written Comments a . Other Evidence: Clark Mapes, City Planner gave the staff presentation. He stated that this was a request to amend the City Structure Plan and -rezone three parcels of land near the northeast corner of the intersection of Taft Hill Road and Hull Street. Just south of Drake Road. The existing land use designation is LMN, Low Density Mixed Use Neighborhood and the requested designation is MMN, Medium Density Mixed Use Neighborhood. Planne,rMapes reviewed a visual for the Board showing the site. Staff is recommending denial of this application due to staff not finding an adequate need for the change to the S ructure Plan. The change would also hav�to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Planner Mapes showed a visual of the Structure Plan and explained that when the Structure Plan land use designations in place were originally develop , this property was deliberately not designated in the medium density district which as been requested. P nner Mapes went on to explain that there were some attributes of this site ich — or example, it is within a quarter mile of the supermarket anchored neighborhood Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 8 Member Craig felt there were still some incompatible uses that could happen under the CCN. She felt that if the LMN zone was being looked at, it would help out the neighborhood. Member Colton asked why staff was leaning toward CCN and not LMN. It looks to him that the proposed use would have to come in under a Type 2 review under either zoning. Planner Shepard replied that under either zone, a Wingshadow application would have to come in as a Type 2. However, under and LMN a request for modification would have to accompany the request because of the number of residents served in the group facility. He referred the remainder of the question to Clark Mapes who was the project manager on the North College Corridor Plan. Planner Mapes responded that the existing building appears to lend itself to this type of operation. Whether it is a group home or the school or the combination, it was developed as "sort" of a group home, it is a transitional location, and is buffered from the neighborhood with the power line easement. It looks like the building and the uses that would go into the facility the way that it is, fit better in the CCN zone than in the more limited LMN. Member Torgerson moved to recommend to City Council a change in the Structure Plan amending from Industrial to Community Commercial North College for project #30-02. Member Meyer seconded the motion. Member Craig commented that she hears what staff is saying for the CCN zone, but she still has concerns and would prefer the zoning to be LMN. She would not be supporting the motion. Chairperson Gavaldon favored the LMN zone to keep the process and sizes of group homes to a manageable state so they can function. However, we do have a modification process and many have used it and have been successful. He thinks the applicant should be given the burden to follow the criteria and use it. There is some merit for the CCN zone but a lot of the uses should not be in the proximity of single family homes. The motion was approved 4-2 with Members Craig and Gavaldon voting in the negative. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 7 about neighborhood compatibility when we open up the zone to CCN. Especially when the neighbors have only 3 or 4 foot fences. Is there too big of a door being opened here. Planner Shepard replied that he did not think so. It was interesting that she mentioned neighborhood compatibility because that was one of the primary land use review criterions that was used under performance zoning. Which was how the property was developed in the first place back in 1985 for a 30-day drug and alcohol rehabilitation clinic. It is developed in such a way that it has sensitive architecture, well landscaped and the distance between the facility and the properties to the north are buffered by the existing power line easement, which can never be built on, so it will always stay as open space. Certainly that could be enhanced with some fencing and landscaping and that will be discussed at the neighborhood meeting. The CCN is designed to be a contributing zone district to a mixed -use activity center to transition North College Avenue to the neighborhoods. Chairperson Gavaldon asked if the intent of group homes is to be dispersed evenly throughout the city. Planner Shepard replied that was one of the criteria for a group homes, there are others, there are separation requirements for each zone district. Chairperson Gavaldon asked if this would be the largest of group homes. Planner Shepard replied that he would have to check the data more carefully. He did not break the data down by type of group home. We do have the information as to type of group home, size and type of resident being served. Chairperson Gavaldon asked for that information at the time of PDP. Member Colton also thought that the I, Industrial zoning was not appropriate. He reminded the neighbors of the possible uses that could occur on this property with I, Industrial zoning. He thought that they could get something much worse if the property is not rezoned, not just this one use. He felt that the CCN or the LMN are better choices for zoning of this property because they have less intense uses next to a neighborhood. He is looking at the long-term interest of the neighborhood on what could be there. Don't just look at what is there or this one use. Don't get fixated on this one use because that comes through another hearing and things like the fences will be looked at for appropriate buffers. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 6 have a place to be able to put their children so they can go to school so they can become better citizens and be able to hold down jobs and be able to help themselves. Mr. Bolton planned on the neighbors meeting some of the students and staff and he felt that some of their fears would be eased in a lot of ways. It is no where near the concern or the fear that he is hearing. He thinks that as more understanding comes about, that this will be received much better by the neighbors there. Planner Shepard addressed some of the concerns brought up during public input. Planner Shepard handed out a table that referenced what uses would be allowed in the I, Industrial zone and in the CCN zone. The uses listed are the uses proposed by the applicant. Planner Shepard reviewed the uses in the 2 zoning districts and whether they would be a Type 1 or Type 2 review. The next step in the process would be, if the rezoning is approved by City Council, for the applicant to submit a Project Development Plan and prior to that submittal a neighborhood information meeting will be held. Member Craig agreed that I, Industrial is not appropriate for this site. She was glad to see that a rezoning is being looked at. She was concerned with the CCN zoning because bars and taverns are a Type 1 review. She wondered how staff felt about that as far as the appropriateness to the neighborhood. Planner Shepard replied that the land uses were talked about a lot during 1995 — 1997 when they were doing the Land Use Code and putting uses into certain zone districts. Bars and taverns are allowed in a lot of zone districts. Shopping centers such as Toddy's at Drake and Lemay allow bars and taverns. Liquor licensing is done under a separate authority. Bars and taverns are considered to be one of the contributing mix of land uses in activity centers. Member Craig appreciated that but her concern was this little 5 acres, since we are rezoning for the long term. Anything that is put on there is not necessarily going to be there even as short as 10 years. It concerns her that we might be opening that door, whereas, with LMN zoning that would not be an issue at all. A group home could still come through the process under LMN. Clark Mapes, City Planner with Advanced Planning replied that the reason that bars and taverns are in the CCN zone, is that it is seen as a transitional mix neighborhood. You think of a "pub" which is what we would be thinking of — that would be a very large bar or tavem if it went into this building. Nightclubs are a separate use that is not listed. Think of the neighborhood grills. Member Craig brought it up because she felt that neighborhood compatibility is a concern of the neighborhood. Even though they are only focusing on the group home, which needs to be addressed when it comes in as a project, it made her start thinking Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 5 trapping in and out, which would include the children and the residents that may stay anywhere from 24 hours to 60 days. He was curious as to if they feel they can control that many children with the staff they are going to have. Are they going to add to their staff, are they going to give them any guarantees that they can take care of their children either in school or after school when they get out and are walking through our neighborhood to get home, or to the park, or wherever they want to go. He also has an issue with traffic. He feels that Bayberry Circle will be used as a cut through to make shorter routes to and from Willox for those children who can drive. Haven Marsh, Assistant Administrator at Frontier High School addressed the Board. Ms. Marsh wanted to respond to some of the questions that she heard the citizens talking about. She addressed the driving issue. Presently they have about 66 students and of those about a dozen are driving. They also don't expect to see a rapid growth in the population, they would be growing slowly over time. She thought the maximum projected student enrollment would be about 110. There would not be an immediate increase in students. Paul Cujay, Director of Eagle Homes stated that he had heard some comments about being able to manage the youth. They do have a group home in the Boxelder neighborhood and they have been there for a year and a half now. He feels they have developed some excellent relationships with that neighborhood. One of the expectations for all the young people they work with is that they are good citizens within the community. They monitor that very closely and that is a consistent expectation across the board. They hope to bring that same culture and that same focus to the neighborhood that they are moving into. They are excellent citizens and are very concerned with the impact and they want to do that very collaboratively with the neighborhood. Public Input Closed Mr. Bolton, gave the applicant's rebuttal. They will definitely be increasing their staff and they will be doing that appropriately. What they do is licensed through the State of Colorado. They are not just out doing something where they are trying to get by as cheaply as possible. Their approach is to do a very good and very professional job of what they do with these young people. That is why they have had such a success. Very few of their young people drive. They like the bus stop that is located next to the facility on Conifer. Most of the students live south of the facility and as far as cut through traffic in the neighborhood he sees the overwhelming majority going to College and Lemay from Conifer to go south. Mr. Bolton stated that their goal was to work with their young people to become good citizens as well as to get a good education. They also want to be good neighbors. What they are trying to do is provide a place for these young people to go to be able to have a place to stay or have a place to go to school, or Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 4 Phil Palmer, 501 Nokomis Court, which is one of the homes directly north of the facility. He stated that this is America and obviously they have a choice of doing what they want with the property. He wanted to know what kind of consequences, if approved, to protect the immediate property owners to the north. There are eight homes, which have 3 and 4 foot fences with no privacy at all. He asked that if this proposal is approved that consideration is given to the property owners immediately to the north. They are totally visible to all the activities that might go on. They have lived there for five years, when it was an assisted living center; they felt comfortable because of the elderly people who were living there. The situation that is being looked at now is a much different with the children. He hoped that another business would be looked at for that facility. He did not think that this was the only choice for this building and he was very concerned for their property values. They already had a 100,000 volt power line put in their back yard and now this, and they feel just a little victimized by what has been going on. Steven Fratwell, lives in Timber Ridge Trailer Park has been going to Frontier School for a little while. He likes the place that they are at now, but felt that they were too crowded. He and his friends don't have very much room there and he has been looking forward to moving over to the new place so they can have more room. Elizabeth Rowley, 615 Bayberry Circle stated that her biggest concern is the traffic problem that already exists in the neighborhood. Now that she has found out that there could be 100 kids, some of them driving age, that makes her very concerned. She is also very concerned with Greenbriar Park and what might happen to the park if the kids start hanging out in the park. She is concerned that these kids will hang out in the neighborhood. The bus stops are right across the street from where this is going to be and that really concerns her. She has serious concerns what is going to happen with their neighborhood if this gets approved. This is a very young neighborhood with a lot of little children and adding more teenage traffic to the area will be devastating. They already want speed bumps as it is. Cliff Buckholz who is on the Board of Directors for Wingshadow spoke to the Board. He stated that he needed some clarification. Right now the property is zoned I, Industrial and there are certain things that can take place in an industrial zone. He assumed that before something could take place in that zoning it would have to go through the development plan process. He asked if the zoning was left as it is, would the school be allowed in an industrial area. He asked if there is a change in the zoning, what takes place after that. Is the school in question, is the daycare center in question, is the treatment center in question, and is the homeless shelter in question. What would be in question at this stage and at the next stage? Citizen, no name, commented that his concern was the jump from the 70 kids they have now and that they feel they can control up to the 200 some kids that are going to be Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 3 and strictly children. Some of those kids would go to the high school and some would go back to the public schools. The kids would stay there until they could get connected into the system, which might be foster homes or into a group home somewhere. Mr. Bolton shared a schematic plan of the building. He stated that the high school would be on the southwest side of the building. The preschool, toddlers and babies would be on the northwest side of the building. Their corporate offices would make up most of the center of the building, and the day treatment would be across from the corporate offices. He also explained where the kitchen and group care facility would be located within the building. Mr. Bolton offered brochures of information to share more about what their corporation does. He stated that they have a staff that works well with the young people and is able to control and not allow the kids to be running wild, which is some of the concerns that the citizens have. Mr. Bolton stated that it was their desire to be good neighbors and cooperate with the people around them. PUBLIC INPUT Lane Osterle, 650 Bayberry Circle stated that she was at this rezoning meeting to address many of her neighbors and her concerns regarding the proposed rezoning of the property at 1225 Redwood Street. Ms. Osterle stated that she first became aware of the issue in the middle of August when she saw the posted rezoning sign on the property. At that time she communicated with Planner Shepard at the Planning office regarding the proposal. Ms. Osterle presented the Board with a petition (Exhibit 2) signed by residents of the neighborhood directly affected by this facility. She also presented a list of questions (Exhibit 3) that arose as her neighborhood was canvassed. She also presented the board with a letter (Exhibit 4) from Ted and Ellen Zibell who have had experience with residential shelters. A list of concerns (Exhibit 5) was presented that was generated by neighbors and herself as they considered the repercussions of having this facility at this location. Ms. Osterle stated that the neighborhood would appreciate a neighborhood meeting by the Director of Planning and Mr. Bolton before any conclusive decisions are made of the rezoning of the property. It appears that a neighborhood meeting is not a mandatory requirement. The meeting would be an attempt to express our heartfelt thoughts as citizens who will be directly impacted by any decision that is made on this issue as it involves the safety of our children, the safety of our neighborhood, protection of our investment in our property. It is the opinion that this rezoning proposal doesn't make sense in a residential area like this. It is high density with young children. This area does contain our children, neighborhood and our property. All those things are at stake and at this time, the neighborhood opposes the change in the zoning. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes September 19, 2002 Page 2 Recommendation: Approval Hearinq Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Ted Shepard, Chief Planner gave the staff presentation. He stated that the request was to rezone 1225 Redwood from I, Industrial to CCN, Community Commercial North College. Planner Shepard reminded the Board that the process tonight was to first amend the Structure Plan Map and then recommend the zoning. Planner Shepard referenced a memo (Exhibit 1) that he handed out tonight that restates the justification for a Structure Plan amendment. Planner Shepard explained that the Structure Plan Amendment justification is found in the North College Avenue Corridor Plan, primarily under Policy LU2. Staff is recommending that the project be rezoned to CCN to further act as a transition between the intensity of land uses along North College Avenue, visa vie the neighborhoods to the east. Planner Shepard pointed out for the board and the citizens that there is an applicant for this project that is called Wingshadow, Inc., it is a non-profit agency that provides a variety of services to the youth of our city. For the Wingshadow project to come to fruition and operate the facility, they have to go through a two step process as well. The first step is tonight, which is a recommendation to City Council on the rezoning. That will not by itself allow Wingshadow to operate the facility. The second step of the process would be that they would then have to submit to the Planning Department a Project Development Plan. That process would be separate and would include a neighborhood information meeting and a public hearing in front of the Planning and Zoning Board as well. Planner Shepard displayed a map of all the approved group homes within the city of Fort Collins. Steve Bolton, applicant on the project gave a presentation to the Board. He stated that they presently have a school, Frontier High School, at the First Christian Church on the corner of Lemay Avenue and Drake. They also have a child care center in there as well. Right now they have approximately 68 kids enrolled in school and 17 babies and toddlers in the daycare, which are the children of the teen mothers that go to school at Frontier High School. At the property at 1225 Redwood, which they are wanting to move the school to, the school would increase from 68 to 110 kids, and from having 17 babies and toddlers to 40 babies, toddlers and preschoolers. They would also like to open a day treatment center for some of the kids who have problems in the classroom, where they could give them more intensive care in that day treatment setting. That would include about 12 to 14 kids. There would also be a commercial kitchen and dining room area where they would be feeding the kids that go there. There would be a group care facility for children 10 to 17 years old who would be taken out of their homes by authorities in Fort Collins and Larimer County that would stay, some short-term, 24 to 72 hours, and some up to 60 days at the facility. That would be approximately 18 kids Council Liaison: Karen Weitkunat Chairperson: Jerry Gavaldon Vice Chair: Mikal Toraerson Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss Phone: (H) 484-2034 Phone: (W) 416-7435 Chairperson Gavaldon called the meeting to order at 6:32 p.m. Roll Call: Meyer, Colton, Craig, Torgerson, Bernth and Gavaldon. Member Carpenter was absent. Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Shepard, Wamhoff, Moore, Mapes, Stringer, Stanford, Manci, Alfers and Deines. Agenda Review: Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: Consent Agenda: 1. Minutes of the April 4, August 15, and September 5 (Continued), 2002 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings. 2. Resolution PZ02-07 — Easement Vacation. Discussion: 3. #30-02 1225 Redwood Street Rezoning and Structure Plan Amendment. 4. #31-02 Taft Hill/Hull Rezoning and Structure Plan Amendment. 5. #3-OOB Timan Property Rezoning and Structure Plan Amendment. 6. #31-95 Hearthfire PUD, Second Filing — Final. 7. #37-02 701 Wagner Drive — Modification of Standard. Member Torgerson moved for approval of Consent items 1, less the September 5"' minutes and item 2. Member Craig seconded the motion. The motion was approved 6-0. Project: 1224, Redwood Street Rezoning and Structure Plan Amendment. Project Description: Request to rezone 1225 Redwood Street from I, Industrial, to C-C-N, Community Commercial North College. The parcel is 5.5 acres in size and located on the northwest corner of Conifer Street and Redwood Street.