HomeMy WebLinkAboutREFERRED MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE RIGDEN FARM NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER - 56-98C - DECISION - MINUTES/NOTESPlanning and Zoning Board Minutes
April 5, 2001
Page 26
Planner Jones replied that since the mailboxes were taken out, you could now park a
car and get out there. The city also requires parking for the office.
Member Bernth moved for approval of the change to the Rigden Farm Overall
Development Plan.
Member Carpenter seconded the motion.
Member Craig would not be supporting the motion. She felt this was a change in the
character of the development.
Member Colton also would not be supporting the motion.
The motion was approved 4-2 with Members Colton and Craig voting in the
negative.
Member Bernth moved for approval of the change to the Rigden Farm Filing One
Project Development Plan.
Member Carpenter seconded the motion.
The motion was approved 4-2 with Members Colton and Craig voting in the
negative.
There was no other business.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
April 5, 2001
Page 25
• that minor amendment results in the change in character of the development.
A major amendment would be any type of amendment that does not qualify as a minor
amendment. A major amendment would go to the Planning and Zoning Board and it
would be very similar to what they are seeing tonight, but it would have a different title
on the staff report. It would be the same set of issues before the Board.
Planner Jones stated that Mr. Glaser had brought up the issue of change in character of
the development and that was a judgement call by the Board. Staff feels that physically
it is not a change in character and can be processed by a minor amendment.
Member Craig felt this may be a major amendment for a change in character because
she does not view a neighborhood center with house with a fence all the way around it
and gates, etc. Even though they are calling it a mixed -use center, they are gating and
fencing it so it is no longer part of the neighborhood center.
Planner Jones restated that it was up to the Board to determine. Staff feels that the
criteria for a neighborhood center in the LMN zoning district are being satisfied.
Member Colton asked about the convenience store element and was it being dropped.
Mr. Furness replied that in the original plan the convenience store would have been part
of the coffee shop with just some convenience items for the local residents. The intent
was to move that with the coffee shop and just have a little cart with convenience items.
Member Colton stated that Mr. Glaser had a point that he had seen this picture with the
house with umbrellas on the deck and people out having coffee and maybe could be
interpreted as a change in character.
Mr. Furness responded that again it goes back to the LPC and that they were not very
happy with umbrellas and things out on the deck. Their recommendation was that if at
all possible, they preferred them not to add on extensive decks with umbrellas.
Planner Jones stated that Karen McWilliams of the Historic Preservation office reviewed
the request and commented that they would like to see a more residential use in the
house and not commercial. She did not speak on behalf of the LPC.
Member Craig asked if there would be seating and tables.
Mr. Furness replied there would be.
Member Craig asked about the parking area.
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
April 5, 2001
Page 24
emotional issues from the Johnson side of things and they would like them to keep the
house a residence. In essence they are trying to go back to that tradition. Rigden Farm
was setup to comprise a mix of single family and multi -family residences in a multitude
of price ranges along with complimentary commercial uses centered around the
relocated Johnson Farm Homestead Community Center formally located at Drake and
Timberline. Rigden Farm spent about $300,000 relocating the homestead to its current
location. Residents should be able to walk out their front door and feel like they are
stepping back to a simpler friendlier time. Single and multi family home communities
with their own identities will be linked in Rigden Farm by a series of sidewalks, trails and
networks of tree lined streets. Rigden Farm is a nice place to live.
The historic Johnson Farm Homestead, the Community Center, Coffee Shop and a
place for the community to gather is exactly what they are doing at this time. As Mr.
Glaser stated they are in fact changing a little bit of the use, but they are not changing
the use as much as they are relocating the uses. They are taking some of the use and
relocating it out to where the barn is currently. He mentioned a reduction of 57% in the
outside area of the house. That is false. That area has been relocated over near the
barn. On the eastside of the barn, they are putting in a large patio so parents can go to
the barn and get a cup of coffee, sit out on the patio which overlooks the children's
playground area. They think that makes more sense. They have chosen to get rid of
the gang mailboxes because they did not want to cause all the congestion at the
community center where kids are going to be playing and people will have their
community gardens. All of the buildings are still designated, with the exception of the
house and the garage as Community Center, open to the public buildings. The house
will still be open to the HOA members.
Public Input Closed
Member Colton asked what the criteria were for judging a minor amendment like this.
Planner Jones replied that in Section 2.2.10 of the Land Use Code it talks about
amendments to approved plans. Item A in that Section talks about minor amendments
and item B talks about major amendments. Minor amendments stated that any change
to an approved development plan or site specific plan basically could be amended
through this minor amendment process. There are four items that need to be satisfied,
• that minor amendment would result in an increase or decrease by 1 % or less in the
approved number of dwelling units
• that the minor amendment results in an increase or decrease in the amount of
square footage in a non-residential structure that does not change the character of
the project
• that the minor amendment results in change in the housing mix ratio
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
April 5, 2001
Page 23
decks and patios where there would be the ability for the homeowners to come together
and participate. Now this use is being crammed into the barn, which is less that 1,500
s.f., and within the barn there would be both basketball and a coffee shop. He didn't
feel that it was big enough to play basketball or have a dance or to even have a
homeowner's association meeting. They are trying to put too much into too small of a
space.
Mr. Glaser stated that he supported what Rigden Farm is doing for the most part. He
paid more to be in Rigden Farm because of the Master Plan, because of the sculpture
they are putting in the entryway and because of the lantern lighting they have
throughout and because of the neighborhood center. Mr. Glaser felt that they should be
congratulated for putting together a very fine development in our community, but do we
need to give them special consideration for doing what they said they would do. The
signatures of the landowners are of no consequence, why, because he believes the
signatures were obtained with incomplete disclosures to the landowners. It was his
understanding that most of the signatures were obtained without really seeing what the
plan would be for the barn and how confined two incompatible uses would be.
Second, he felt the truly affected parties were not here tonight. They would be the
people who are buying the condominiums, and the homes that are being built in Rigden
Farm. Those are the people he felt were being shortchanged. He has done some
cursory review to find that there are numerous ways that we can instill community pride,
activities within the community without having to have a landmark devoted to a private
residence. It is in a prominent location and it is and will probably remain the most
prominent building in the residential portion of Rigden Farm. To make it a private
residence for the most part, would be terribly unfortunate. It needs to have access to
the community as per the original plan.
There is no dispute in his mind that this project is a change in character. Will the
outside of the house look the same, yes for the most part, although they have
decreased the exterior space by 57%. The exterior of the house would look the same,
but the exterior character is going to be greatly changed because now it is going to
become a private residence as opposed to a congregating place, a meeting place, a
place of vitality.
Fred Croce, one of five owners of the Rigden Farm LLC stated that three years ago
when they set out to develop Rigden Farm, they were the first to go under City Plan.
Things have changed, some of the things they decided to do back then, they have in
retrospect looked back and thought they may have made some error in their judgement
at that time. One of those has to do with comments that they have gotten from Historic
Preservation. One of the things they asked them to do initially, was to try to keep the
house a house. Calvin Johnson's family was raised there and there were some
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
April 5, 2001
Page 22
The house originally was designated on the approved plan as having a coffee shop, PO
boxes, convenience store and a large deck on the eastside of the building. The barn
was to have a meeting area, basketball, dance hall and daycare. With the proposed
change, the house is now a mixed use dwelling with office and the barn is a meeting
area, basketball, dance hall and coffee shop. He stated that staff felt that the request
was meeting the criteria within the Land Use Code for neighborhood centers.
Member Craig asked how the new proposal meets the criteria of a "neighborhood
center".
Planner Jones replied that those standards were in the LMN zone district for
neighborhood centers. There are 5 categories of criteria for neighborhood centers.
• Access to a neighborhood center
• Location
• Land Use Requirements
• Design and Access
• Outdoor Spaces
Planner Jones read the Land Use requirements, which he thought that Member Craig
was referring to in her question. The change is to put in a mixed -use dwelling in the
house and since that is one of the uses allowed including an office located in the same
building which is also a permitted use. The criteria states that the requirement is to
have two uses from the list and those two uses are on the list.
Member Craig asked what size the office would be in the house.
Vaughn Furness, Jim Sell Design representing the applicant gave a brief presentation.
He stated that the office would be approximately'/4 of the house and it is to run the
Rigden Farm LLC Homeowner's Association.
Public Input
Carl Glaser, owner and developer of Parcel F, which is diagonally opposite from the
proposed Neighborhood Community Center. He referred to the letter he sent the Board,
which was given to them prior to this meeting. He questioned the mixed -use dwelling
and he thought that it would have something of greater variety than an office. The
residence was always intended to have an office for the management of Rigden Farm.
To make it into a residence that is going to be a private residence for the caretaker and
a wife that would be the social director makes it a private configuration. All of the
marketing drawings that were presented by Rigden Farm in his purchase of his parcel
indicated a very lively, interactive space with banners and lights and umbrellas and
Planning and Zoning Board Minutes
April 5, 2001
Page 21
Council. He felt that we could live with the natural area enforcement that we currently
have.
The motion for denial was denied 5-2 with Members Craig and Colton voting for
the motion.
Member Bernth recommended approval of the eight aforementioned annexations
with zoning of POL, Public Open Lands.
Member Torgerson seconded the motion.
Member Carpenter felt it made sense when the city owns the natural areas to have
more control and have a better enforcement of regulations.
Member Torgerson concurred and added that what was found in a study a year ago
was that enclave annexations cost a lot now, but they cost a lot more in the future.
The motion was approved 5-2 with Members Colton and Craig voting in the
negative.
Project: Referred Minor Amendment to the Rigden
Farm Neighborhood Centerr
Project Description: Minor Amendment application to change the
Rigden Farm ODP, and the Rigden Farm,
Filing One PDP. The request is to change
some of the permitted uses and the
configuration within the Rigden Farm
Neighborhood Center.
Recommendation: Approval
Hearing Testimony, Written Comments and Other Evidence:
Member Torgerson excused himself due to a conflict of interest on the project.
Troy Jones, City Planner gave the staff presentation. The project is referred to the
Planning and Zoning Board because there is known opposition by a neighbor. Planner
Jones reviewed some site shots to illustrate the request. The request is to change the
uses of the Neighborhood Center, which includes the Johnson House and the adjacent
barn, which were approved as part of the Rigden Farm Filing One with specific uses.
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 1" Natural Area Annexation & Zoning
6.
#40-98A
Cathy Fromme 2Id Natural Area Annexation & Zoning
7.
#43-98
Coyote Ridge 1st Annexation & Zoning
8.
#43-98A
Coyote Ridge 2"d Annexation & Zoning
9.
#43-98B
Coyote Ridge 3`d Annexation & Zoning
10.
#43-98C
Coyote Ridge 4th Annexation & Zoning
11.
#43-98D
Coyote Ridge 5t" 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 18M only. Member
Bernth seconded the motion. The motion was approved 7-0.