Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIDGEWOOD HILLS REZONE - 4-01 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes April 5, 2001 Page 12 Member Colton moved to recommend to City Council approval of the Ridgewood Hills Rezoning, #4-01 based on the criteria that the amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. That the amendment to the zoning map was warranted by changed conditions within the neighborhood surrounding and including the subject property because of the oversight. Also, that the zoning proposed amendment was compatible with existing and proposed uses surrounding the subject land, and is the appropriate zone district for the land; and that the proposed amendment would result in a logical and orderly development pattern. Member Bernth seconded the motion. Member Craig thanked the neighbors for coming tonight and she hoped the Board addressed their concerns. She encouraged them to stay in touch with the process when a PDP does come in. She would like their concerns to be addressed, but that could not happen until a development proposal comes in. Member Carpenter would support the motion, and encouraged the neighbors to continue to participate at the PDP level. Member Colton also did not like when erroneous information or multiple types of information goes out when people rely on that to make a decision. He does believe that this was best for the community and does fit with what we are trying to do with City Plan. The motion was approved 7-0. t: Poudre Development Rezoning, #1-01 Project Descrip ' Request to rezone the Poudry-6evelo/pment parcel from T, Tra"rr, to CCR, Community Commercial -Rive. The parcel is 21.7 acres in `size -and -located on the east side of the Poudre `River bourrded_by Linden Street, Buckingham Street and First Street.- Recomme ion: Approval Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 5, 2001 Page 11 Member Colton felt that the LMN zoning district was consistent with what we want out of City Plan with having a mixture of uses. He felt that this was an appropriate zoning in that we need to rely on the neighborhood compatibility and traffic studies to not get too intense of a use there. Member Meyer agreed with Member Colton and felt LMN was an appropriate zone. Member Carpenter agreed, but with information given out that this would be single family, she felt we had an obligation to the homeowner's in the area. She asked if rezoning could be done after a use has been determined. Kim Straw, Cityscape Urban Design stated that technically they could, but that would be asking Melody Homes to take a fairly large risk. There would be expenses incurred for anyone. Also, the way the city process is set up, as far as review goes, that is usually not the way it goes. You can only come in twice a year for a rezoning, and if you miss that date, you have to wait 6 more months. She felt it just did not seem realistic. Planner Shepard added that we have standards in the code that would deal with issues such as traffic, lighting, hours of operation, etc. He asked to keep in mind that when the code was written, we took all the LDGS performance standards, and added a whole bunch more. Member Craig agreed with Member Carpenter about the predictability here. If the neighbors had come in tonight and asked that the zoning be left RL, she did not hear that from them. She got from them that they did not care about rezoning, but was more concerned about what would go in there. She felt that the next step would be the PDP, where there is a criterion for neighborhood compatibility. Member Bernth asked Mr. Rowe if his primary concern was the gas. Mr. Rowe replied that he is not only speaking as an individual, but on behalf of his HOA. He realized that development is inevitable, but firmly believes that it has to be sensitive to the people within the community. He has seen three maps for Ridgewood Hills and has heard Realtors tell people that the parcel would be single family homes or a greenbelt area. When he bought his townhome, the builder produced a map that showed a convenience store and some professional office buildings and the daycare site. He bought anyway because he assumed that the city would address it and felt that it would be done tastefully. He felt that people made decisions to invest in that property based on what they were told and that there was three different zoning maps that people could have seen. That is where he thinks the confusion lies. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 5, 2001 Page 10 LMN zone, at this time Melody Homes does not have a potential use for the site. She would not be surprised if the traffic study would not allow it anyway. She clarified that at this time they are not proposing a convenience center. Ray Schultz, homeowner, stated that he supported low profile buildings on the site or even additional townhomes which would fit into the surrounding neighborhood. The issue is the broad spectrum of the zoning that they are asking for. He was not sure if there could be limitations. He agreed with his neighbors with what has occurred in the neighborhood to now have a convenience store in place. He saw the need for the rezoning, but did not see a need for a convenience store on that site. Chairperson Gavaldon asked for the question about the daycare center be addressed. Planner Grubb stated that if the childcare center is zoned RL; the childcare center would be a use that would have to be approved by the Planning and Zoning Board. In the LMN zone, it would be a use that would be approved administratively. The other question was would this request be processed if it were not for Melody Homes. His answer would be no, not at this time. This site has already been identified as one where there was a mistake made in 1997. The request would have come forward sooner or later. Melody's desire to have this request heard, expedited the process. Member Carpenter asked if there was a zoning district that could restrict this to a low profile use. Planner Shepard reviewed the LMN District zoning and how it restricted convenience stores with gas or fueling facilities. They cannot be located within 3/4 of a mile of another gas station. This site is within 3/4 mile of an existing gas station at the corner of College and Trilby. Therefore, there could be no gas at this site if it were rezoned LMN. Member Colton asked what traffic process would be done for this site. Planner Grubb stated that a traffic study would be required at the time of PDP, and staff would review it at that time. His opinion was that this was not a site that would draw a lot of traffic from other areas. There were just not enough trips per day, right now, to warrant that type of a use. It was not going to be a destination use; it really is a use that will benefit the neighborhood. Member Craig asked if the property were zoned LMN, and Melody Homes came in with a proposal for multi -family housing, detached or attached single family, would the Overall Development Plan have to be amended. Planner Grubb replied that the ODP expired January 17, 2000, under Ordinance 161 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 5, 2001 Page 9 Chairperson Gavaldon asked if the rezoning did anything to the approved Overall Development Plan or approved preliminary plan. Planner Grubb replied that they expired in January of 2000. PUBLIC INPUT Lloyd Rowe, representing the Ridgewood Hills Village Homeowner's Association, which oversees the townhomes clarified that the Master Association maintained the trees in the entry area. Ridgewood Hills Village HOA pays a fee to the Master Association yearly to maintain the greenbelt area and the entryway. He stated that the members in the townhome area don't really have an issue with the rezoning, but do have an issue with what may go in there. Most concerns are with traffic in the area. He stated that another convenience center is planned at Trilby and Shields and there is currently another one at Trilby and College and at County Road 32. He stated that County Road 32 would eventually be extended west to connect to Avondale, which will feed into Trilby. Mr. Rowe stated that most residents felt that we do not need a convenience store or gas station and felt that it would ruin the aesthetic beauty of their entryway into their community. Don Wells, homeowner in Ridgewood Hills Village Townhomes asked if the RL zone allowed childcare centers. He did not feel that a rezoning should be done to just allow the childcare center when from what he read in the code, a childcare center would be allowed in the RL zone. He stated that the information he received at the neighborhood meeting was that if Melody Homes did not request the rezoning at this time, this rezoning request would not be processed at this time by the city. He stated that Melody Homes told him that they had no plans to develop the parcel at this time. He was strongly opposed to putting a convenience store there, but is not opposed to a low density professional building. He stated that there are so many things that could be built under the LMN zone that would not be good for their community. Dick Coral, lives immediately west of the childcare center concurred with his neighbors. He stated that they did not need a rezoning and he was also opposed to a convenience store. Frank Skurbetz, homeowner, also agreed with his neighbors. He supported the previous speaker's reasons not to rezone. Kim Straw, Cityscape Urban Design, representing Melody Homes stated that they concurred with staffs recommendation for approval. She stated that the concerns raised about a gas station or convenience store were not the reason they were here tonight, it was for the rezoning. While a convenience center is a potential use in the Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 5, 2001 Page 8 Planner Grubb replied that there might be some things that may just be an inconvenience and some things that may cause problems. For example if the daycare were to go out of business and remain unoccupied for one year, it would have to become a single family dwelling to be occupied by one family. Member Colton asked to see site shots Planner Grubb reviewed the site shots for the Board. Member Craig asked who put up the white fence that she noticed in the site shots. Planner Grubb replied the developer, but the Homeowner's Association owns the parcel. Member Craig asked if the HOA Association was maintaining the fence, trees and the berm. Planner Grubb replied he assumed so Member Carpenter asked for review of the dates that the dwellings were built and what a potential homeowner would have found had they come to the city and asked what that piece of land could have been at the different dates. Planner Grubb replied there were only a hand full of Certificate of Occupancies issued prior to the rezoning in March of 1997. The bulk of the properties were issued CO's after the rezoning took place. Prior to 1997 an inquiry would have been told that the parcel would be a neighborhood convenience site. After the zoning map was adopted in March of 1997, people would have been told RL, because that was the zoning. If the question were what would be allowed there, the answer would have been single family homes. Member Meyer asked if there was anywhere in the community where a daycare and a convenience store co -exist happily. Planner Shepard replied that one example would be across from the Collindale Golf Course on Horsetooth Road. Member Torgerson asked if the original approved PUD showed a convenience store on the site. Planner Grubb replied it did. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes April 5, 2001 Page 7 Project: Ridgewood Hills Rezoning, #4-01 Project Description: Request to rezone Ridgewood Hills PUD, First Filing, and Ridgewood Hills PUD, First Filing Replat from RL, Low Density Residential to LMN, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. The site is 14.01 acres and located south and adjacent to Trilby Road, north of County Road 32 between College Avenue and Shields Street. Recommendation: Approval Hearinq Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Brian Grubb, City Planner gave the staff presentation. Planner Grubb handed out minutes from the neighborhood meeting. He stated that the property was a mixed -use neighborhood that is almost developed out except for one tract on the site, which is at the southeast corner of Trilby and Avondale Roads. He stated that staff initiated the request that involves about 60 property owners. The reason for the request is that in 1997, when the citywide rezoning process went on, there was an oversight that occurred. This parcel was developing as mixed -use and should have been zoned LMN, Low Density Mixed -Use Neighborhood. What the RL, Low Density Residential zoning did was create some non -conforming uses and limited the existing permitted uses. Planner Grubb stated the purpose of this request was to eliminate the non -conforming uses and allow the undeveloped parcel at the southeast corner of Trilby and Avondale Roads to develop according to a PUD plan that was approved in 1994. Planner Grubb stated that there was a neighborhood meeting which about 25 neighbors attended. The majority of the discussion was how the undeveloped tract may or could develop in the future under the LMN zoning. He stated that the neighborhood was supportive of the rezoning, but hesitant about the rezoning to LMN of the undeveloped parcel because of the uses that could go on that property under the LMN. He stated that there were several letters received and the major concerns were compatibility with the daycare, lighting of the site and traffic. He stated that staff was recommending approval based on the compliance with City Plan and the criteria for approval contained in Section 2.9.4 of the Land Use Code. Member Craig asked if the property were left in the RL, what would be the consequences of the people living there now? Chairperson Colton called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. Roll Call: Colton, Bernth, Craig, Gavaldon, Carpenter, Meyer and Torgerson. Staff Present: Shepard, Eckman, Grubb, Olt, McCallum, Moore, Jakson, Stringer, Jones, Wilder and Deines. Agenda Review: Chief Planner Ted Shepard reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: Consent Agenda: 1. Minutes of the May 18, November 16 and December 7, 2000 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings. 2. #3-90H Westbrooke PUD, Second Filing - Final Discussion Agenda: 3. #4-01 Ridgewood Hills Rezoning 4. #1-01 Poudre Development Rezoning 5. #40-98 Cathy Fromme 15t Natural Area Annexation & Zoning 6. #40-98A Cathy Fromme 2"d Natural Area Annexation & Zoning 7. #43-98 Coyote Ridge 1st Annexation & Zoning 8. #43-98A Coyote Ridge 2"d Annexation & Zoning 9. #43-9813 Coyote Ridge 3`d Annexation & Zoning 10. #43-98C Coyote Ridge 4th Annexation & Zoning 11. #43-98D Coyote Ridge Sth Annexation & Zoning 12. #43-98E Coyote Ridge 6th Annexation & Zoning 13. Referred Minor Amendment to the Rigden Farm Neighborhood Center. Member Craig pulled Item 2, Westbrooke PUD, Second Filing for discussion. Member Carpenter moved for approval of Consent Item 1, May 18th only. Member Bernth seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0.