Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTIMBERLINE LEARNING CENTER - PDP/FDP - 31-00 - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 8 Member Craig moved to approve Timberline Learning Center, Project Development Plan with two conditions. One, being the maximum number of children to 12. Also the hours of operation being 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 P.M. closed holidays and weekends. Member Gavaldon seconded the motion. Member Torgerson had a hard time believing that 12 could work economically and asked the applicant to respond. Ms. Schlotz responded that economically 12 would work for them, but 16 is the ideal number for them. The motion was approved 7-0. Project: Johnson Farm Rezone and Structure Plan Amendment. #24-00 Project Description: Request to rezone approximately 55.35 acres of property located on the northwest corner of Timberline Road and Drake Road. The property is currently zoned T, Transitional. The Structure Plan designation for the entire property is Employment. The applicant is proposing to amend the Structure Plan to change 18.56 acres to Low Density Mixed - Use Residential, 29.62 acres to Medium Density Mixed -Use Residential, and to maintain 7.18 acres as Employment. The applicant is also requesting to rezone the property to a combination of LMN, MMN, and E to correspond to the requested Structure Plan amendment. Recommendation: Approval Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 7 Chairperson Colton asked what it would take to put this back to a residential use. Planner Olt replied that it could be done administratively as a minor amendment and it would require a building permit. It could be readily converted back to a residence without too much difficulty if the daycare would cease operation. Chairperson Colton commented that he understood the neighbors concerns, but it is an allowable use. What criteria do you use to say that 80 trips, which is equivalent to 8 houses is too much just because it is in a cul-de-sac. Member Carpenter was concerned about the project. She cannot believe that when the Land Use Code was written that the intent was that you could buy a house in a residential neighborhood with houses already built next to you and someone can just come in and change it to a commercial use. She can't find any way to deny it, but she felt this was something that needed to be looked at, and was this something that we really meant to happen in the Code. Residential areas are meant to be residential and if people are able to go in and convert to businesses, it takes away the predictability and certainty away from homeowners. Member Meyer commended the applicant on this idea. She felt 16 children was doable and she felt this was a nice alternative to places like Children's World. She understands the neighbors concerns, but it does beat Children's World coming to your neighborhood. Member Bernth asked the applicant how did the Board know that there was only going to be 16 children. Could that change in the future if there are three or four working at the facility? Ms. Schlotz replied that it could change, but the number they had planned on was 16, because her and Terry were the only ones that would be running the center. She felt that if they wanted to expand, it would not be at this place, they would seek another location and turn the residence back into a home. Member Bernth felt the Board should look at some limit to the number of children allowed at this center. Planner Olt commented that an approval of this development plan would limit the center to 16 children. A note would be put on the plan as to the limit of the number of children. The Board does have the option of chbnging that number and conditioning the project. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 6 Member Carpenter asked if they already own the home. Ms. Schlotz replied yes. Member Carpenter thought this was a little unusual, and normally a childcare center is a commercial use and it is not done in a home like this. She asked if the definition in the Land Use Code was meant for this type of daycare center. Or should this be classified as a daycare home. Planner Olt replied that as defined in the Land Use Code, a childcare center, be it in a home or a developed constructed new childcare center is one in the same. He stated that there is one similar to this one on Matthews Street that is an existing residence. Member Bernth asked what number of children did make sense from an economic standpoint. Ms. Schlotz replied 16, but 12 would be the minimum economically for the two of them. Member Bernth asked about the fence in the backyard that one of the neighbors had mentioned and was there any plans to improve the fence. Ms. Schlotz replied that she did not think the fence needed improvement right now. She stated that if a portion of the fence happens to blow down, it would be fixed immediately, and then a whole new fence would be put up. She did not think there was a need for a new fence at this time. Member Torgerson asked if a traffic report was required for this project Planner Olt replied it was not. Member Torgerson asked about the information stated during public input that this use would generate 5 trips per day per child. He asked how that could be. Eric Bracke, Transportation Department replied that was about right for average daily trips, but our level of service standards do not deal with daily trips, we deal with peak hour trips. He said that you would be adding 80 trips per day on a street that is currently carrying 200 to 300 a day and is allowed to carry 1,000. The average childcare center peak hour trips for 16'students is about 13 as an average, and that is 7 in and 6 out and reversed for the P.M. Thirteen trips is so minor for the street network from a peak hour perspective that he did waive the requirement for a traffic study. This was a very minor impact from a traffic perspective. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 5 Member Craig asked if they would be taking school children. Ms. Schlotz replied no. Member Gavaldon asked if there would be after -hour pickups. Ms. Schlotz replied there would. Her and Terry would be there from 7:00 a.m. until 6- 6:30 p.m. That would also be when they would be doing the lawn mowing and other maintenance items to keep the property looking like it does now. Member Gavaldon asked about deliveries to the home. Ms. Schlotz replied that there would be no deliveries. Member Gavaldon asked about security lighting on the house. Ms. Schlotz replied that there are already motion detector lights on the back and front entrance. There will also be timer lights, which will go on and be on for a certain amount of hours. Member Gavaldon asked about the number of children in the daycare and was that discussed at the neighborhood meeting. Ms. Schlotz replied that the reason they choose 16 was because that was what the ratio allowed them to have. They have considered doing a daycare home out of the house instead of a center, but a fewer number may not impact them. Chairperson Colton asked if they would be taking trips out with the children. Ms. Schlotz replied that they would be taking nature walks on the trail in the neighborhood. They will also be taking them to the park across Timberline Road, but they do plan on having extra staff or parents to help with those trips. Chairperson Colton asked Ms. Schlotz to comment on the number of children that they could have. Ms. Schlotz replied that they could do a lesser number. This is her and Terry's livelihood and they love working with children. Sixteen is the State's maximum number that they could have with just the two of them. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 4 Mathew Labate, 2955 Sagebrush Drive spoke about his concerns. Mr. Labate stated that the obvious was that this was a home in a residential neighborhood. He was sure that RL zoning allows daycare centers, but the developer never intended this to be a commercial property. The neighborhood is close knit and he did not want to see any commercialization of it. He stated that the applicants have stated that they wanted to satisfy the needs of children, and he feels that the location is not a safe place for a daycare because it backs up to Timberline Road. The existing fence is about 15 years old and he felt that it was a safety issue for the children, in addition to the additional traffic in the neighborhood all the children in the neighborhood are at risk. Second, the applicant stated they wanted to fulfill a need in the neighborhood. He did not feel a daycare in their neighborhood was needed in the neighborhood when it creates more traffic congestion and decreases their property values and quality of life. Public Input Closed Member Craig asked Mr. Eubank from the neighborhood if there was any neighborhood association in their neighborhood. Mr. Eubank stated that there was not. Member Craig suggested that they form a neighborhood group or association Member Craig asked Mr. Eubank if they would feel more comfortable if someone was living in the house and how many children would they be comfortable with. Mr. Eubank stated that if someone is living in the house, there is a limitation of how many children they can have. He thought maybe 5 or 6. Member Craig asked the applicant about the ratio of adults to children Ms. Schlotz replied that 12 to 18 months are a 1 to 5 ratio, as they hit 2 '/z years old it is a 1 to 8 ratio, and as they get older the ratio goes higher. Member Craig asked Ms. Schlotz about her comment at the neighborhood meeting about staggering pickup and drop-off times and how would she do that. Ms. Schlott replied that with her past experience at Children's World Daycare Center she found that some parents work different hours and they would come in around the same time each day. She stated that the school aged children would be there by 7:30 and be picked up around 3:30 or 4:00. The younger children would come in at 8:30 to 9:00 and be picked up between 5:00 and 6:00 at night. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 3 Ms. Schlotz stated that they would like to provide a loving and safe educational environment and a service to the Fort Collins community. An environment where parents can leave their children, go to their jobs, and feel confident that their children are in the best hands. Ms. Schlotz reviewed a list of activities that would be offered at their center. She also stated that they would be working with Social Services to provide daycare to income restricted families. PUBLIC INPUT Brian Eubank, 2019 Sonora, spoke on behalf of the neighborhood. He stated that as a neighborhood they had discussed the daycare center and they went around and polled all the neighbors to get their feedback on this kind of establishment coming into their neighborhood. He stated that they collected 54 signatures opposed to the proposed project. He stated that their biggest concern was traffic. Mr. Eubank stated that he made some calls and found that traffic out of each residential dwelling generates 9.75 trips per day, and a daycare is 5.4 trips per student. With them providing daycare for 16 children, that would be 86.27 trips per day, which is nine (9) times the original proposed usage. He stated that the neighbors were concerned with that many more trips a day with the safety of their children that play in the neighborhood. Mr. Eubank went on to say that there was a daycare center proposed to be built as part of the Rigden Farms project that would provide daycare options and also a church across the street which also may provide daycare. He stated that the neighborhood was concerned with the maintenance of the property and did not want to see their neighborhood deteriorate. John Hamill, 2031 Sonora Street stated his concerns about the project. Mr. Hamill stated that he was concerned about the quality of life in the neighborhood and was concerned that the quality of life would deteriorate and be damaged by the proposed project. He stated that there were many small children along both sides of the proposed site. He was concerned with the traffic of the cars coming in and out and was concerned with safety. His other concern was property values and his realtor has told him that his property value would decrease if this project were allowed to go into the home next to his. His other concern was the noise level because he has two small children that nap during the day and the neighbor on the other side has a newborn. Ross Pernell, 2013 Sonora Street, lives three doors down from the proposed daycare. Mr. Pernell stated that Kim and Terry's proposal sounds great for the proposed daycare, but his concern was that they live in a quiet residential neighborhood and he did not want to see a place of business set up in what is a close knit residential community. His concerns were the same as the previous speakers, traffic, property values and he is not eager to have things change from what they are now. Planning and Zoning Board Minutes November 16, 2000 Page 2 Project: Timberline Learning Center, Project Development Plan, #31-00 Project Description: Request to convert an existing single family residence to a child care center for up to 16 children. No one will reside at this address if the request if granted. The property is located at 2037 Sonora Street, at the bend onto Sombrero Lane. The lot backs up to Timberline Road, which is to the east. The property is in the RL, Low Density Residential Zoning District. Recommendation: Approval Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence: Steve Olt, City Planner gave the staff presentation. He stated that the Project Development Plan complies with the applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. He stated that the project complied with the process located in Division 2.2, Common Development Review Procedures for Development Applications of Article 2, Administration. The project also complied with standards located in Division 3.2, Site Planning and Design Standards, Division 3.5, Building Standards, and Division 3.6, Transportation and Circulation of Article 3, General Development Standards. It also is a permitted use in Division 4.3, Low Density Residential (RL) of Article 4, Districts. Planner Olt reviewed slides of the proposed project and discussed the site, location, and the parking requirements of the proposed project. Planner Olt stated that staff was recommending approval of the project. Kim Schlotz and Teresa Garcia gave the applicants presentation. They discussed their plan for a daycare. Ms. Schlotz stated that in opening a daycare, they were interested in a smaller facility to provide a more "at home" feeling. Their hours of operation would be from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday thru Friday. Drop times would be between 7:30 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. Pickup times between 3:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. They will be closed on all holidays and weekends. She stated there would be a sign on the property that would be within the restrictions of the sign code identifying the business. The center will be open to sixteen- (16) children ages 2'/2 to 5 years old. State regulations are one adult to eight (8) children. Therefore that was the determining factor in having sixteen children at the center. Council Liaison: Scott Mason Staff Liaison: Cameron Gloss Chairperson: Glen Colton Phone: (H) 225-2760 Vice Chair: Jerry Gavaldon Phone: (H) 484-2034 Chairperson Colton called the meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. Roll Call: Bernth, Meyer, Gavaldon, Craig, Torgerson, Carpenter and Colton. Staff Present: Gloss, Eckman, Olt, Shepard, Jones, Stringer, Bracke, Baker, Williams and Deines. Agenda Review: Director of Current Planning Cameron Gloss reviewed the Consent and Discussion Agendas: Consent Agenda: 1. Minutes of the May 18 and September 7, 2000 Planning and Zoning Board Hearings. (Continued) 2. Modifications of Conditions of Final Approval. 3. Resolution PZ00-26 — Modification of Plat Note. 4. #32-95F Registry Ridge PUD, Second Filing — Preliminary & Final. 5. Recommendation to City Council for Adopting a New City Plan Amendment Process. Discussion Agenda: 6. #31-00 Timberline Learning Center — Project Development Plan 7. #24-00 Johnson Farm Rezone and Structure Plan Amendment 8. Modification of Standard - Rigden Farm, Parkside West PDP 9. Modification of Standard - Rigden Farm, Parkside East PDP 10. Modification of Standard — Richie's Express Carwash (Continued) 11. Recommendation to City Council Regarding the Biannual Revisions, Clarifications and Additions to the Land Use Code. Member Gavaldon moved for approval of Consent Items 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9. Member Meyer seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0.